Legal Opinion

Spleas v. Milwaukee & Suburban Transport Corp.

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided November 26, 1963PublishedCited by 23 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtGordon, J.

1. Absence of Contributory Negligence.

A major contention of the appellant is that the trial court erred in not giving the jury the opportunity to compare the negligence of the bus company driver with the negligence of Spleas. The trial judge took the view that the testimony presented two completely different versions of how the accident happened. If the jury believed the testimony of the bus driver, there would be no negligence on the part of the defendant. On the other hand, if the plaintiffs version were adopted, there could be no negligence on the part of the plaintiff.

From our study of…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Powers v. Allstate InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1960
  2. Puhl v. Milwaukee Automobile InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1959
  3. Lucas v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1962
  4. Diemel v. WeirichWisconsin Supreme Court · 1953
  5. Springen v. Ager Plumbing & Heating, Inc.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1963

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

3Cited by23 opinions

  1. Jagmin v. Simonds Abrasive Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1973
  2. McGarrity v. Welch Plumbing Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1981
  3. Moritz v. Allied American Mutual Fire InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1965
  4. City of Cedarburg Light & Water Commission v. Allis-Chalmers Manufacturing Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1967
  5. Casimere v. HermanWisconsin Supreme Court · 1965

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

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

Powered by the Exa API