Legal Opinion

Schneider v. Neuman

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided November 5, 1957PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWingeRT, J.

The judgment must be affirmed.

1. Negligence issue. Was Neuman negligent as a matter of law in failing to see Yvonne? We think not. Neuman admitted that he was looking straight ahead and did not see the little girl. Appellants contend that the child cannot have traveled very rapidly from the curb to the point of impact with defendant’s car; that she had to cross at least 18 feet of open street, even if she came out from behind a parked car; and that during some of the time she must have been far enough in front of Neuman’s car to be within the range of vision in which he was bound to keep a…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Ruka v. ZiererWisconsin Supreme Court · 1928
  2. Steber v. Chicago & Northwestern Railway Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1909
  3. Stoffle v. HilkerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1926
  4. Terrien v. RoenitzWisconsin Supreme Court · 1934
  5. Thomas v. TeschWisconsin Supreme Court · 1954

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Lisowski v. Milwaukee Automobile Mutual InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1962
  2. Burke v. National Farmers Union Property & Casualty Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1967

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API