Prahl v. Hogensen

This case was here on a former appeal, 185 Wis. 37, 200 N. W. 660, and it was held that the *420verdict rendered as to damages was perverse because of their inadequacy, and the case was reversed and sent back for a new trial. In disposing of the case on the second trial, Judge Schinz, in suggesting a doubt as to plaintiff’s freedom from contributory negligence, says:

“However, upon the appeal of this case to the supreme court from the judgment rendered upon the jury’s verdict in the first trial, the supreme court sent the case back for trial, and I am inclined to the view that in so doing the…