Crossett v. Goelzer
Wisconsin Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtRosenberry, J.
The motions made by the defendants raise two principal questions: First, Was the defendant Henry Goelzer liable by reason of his ownership of the automobile driven by his son? and second, Does the evidence support the verdict? It is the claim of the defendants, that as the Dallman automobile moved northerly the toboggan was thrown out of its regular line of travel by reason of the curve in the road around which it was traveling, and that just immediately preceding the accident.the rope which attached the toboggan to thé automobile broke, thus permitting the toboggan to be thrown across the…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Van Blaricom v. . DodgsonNew York Court of Appeals · 1917
- Arkin v. PageIllinois Supreme Court · 1919
- King v. SmytheTennessee Supreme Court · 1918
- Smith v. JordanMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1912
- Danforth v. FisherSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1908
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by27 opinions
- Necedah Manufacturing Corp. v. Juneau CountyWisconsin Supreme Court · 1932
- Meihost v. MeihostWisconsin Supreme Court · 1966
- Bentson v. BrownWisconsin Supreme Court · 1925
- Hopkins v. DroppersWisconsin Supreme Court · 1924
- Nelson v. Travelers Insurance Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1981
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.