Legal Opinion
Schilling v. Chicago, North Shore & Milwaukee Railroad
Wisconsin Supreme Court
Decided February 18, 1944PublishedCited by 14 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtBarlow, J.
First we will discuss the order sustaining the defendants’ demurrer to the amended complaint of Ragna Marie Schilling. In order to maintain this cause of action in her own name plaintiff must come within the provisions of sec. 331.04 (1), Stats., which so far as applicable here provides:
“Every such action shall be brought by and in the name of the personal representative of such deceased person, . . . provided, that if there be no cause of action in favor of the estate of such decedent and the person or persons to whom the whole amount sued for and recovered belongs, as above provided, shall…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Booth v. FrankensteinWisconsin Supreme Court · 1932
- Neuser v. ThelenWisconsin Supreme Court · 1932
- George v. Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1881
- London Guarantee & Accident Co. v. Wisconsin Public Service Corp.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1938
- Terbush v. BoyleWisconsin Supreme Court · 1935
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Nichols v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1961
- Day v. Allstate Indemnity Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 2011
- Strother v. District of ColumbiaDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1977
- Regie De L'Assurance Automobile Du Quebec v. JensenSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1987
- Hailey Marie-Joe Force v. American Family Mutual Insurance CompanyWisconsin Supreme Court · 2014
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.