Legal Opinion

Ven Rooy v. Farmers Mutual Automobile Insurance

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided November 5, 1958PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHallows, J.

The main issue raised by this appeal is the question of the assumption of risk by the plaintiffs. As a general rule before a guest can be held to have assumed the risk of his host’s negligence the evidence must show three factors, to wit: (1) The hazard or danger inconsistent with the safety of the guest; (2) knowledge and appreciation of the hazard by the guest, and (3) acquiescence or a willingness to proceed in the face of danger. Prunty v. Vandenberg (1950), 257 Wis. 469, 44 N. W. (2d) 246. Instructions to the jury in accordance with this rule were given by the trial court in connection…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Frey v. DickWisconsin Supreme Court · 1956
  2. Prunty v. VandenbergWisconsin Supreme Court · 1950
  3. Bronk v. MijalWisconsin Supreme Court · 1957
  4. Oldenburg v. O'BrienWisconsin Supreme Court · 1956
  5. Topel v. CorrezWisconsin Supreme Court · 1956

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Wisconsin Builders, Inc. v. General Insurance Co. of AmericaWisconsin Supreme Court · 1974
  2. Stotzheim v. DjosSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1959
  3. Haase v. R&P Industrial Chimney Repair Co.Court of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1987
  4. Schinke v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1960
  5. Severson v. HauckWisconsin Supreme Court · 1960

1 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