Mahoney v. Thill
Wisconsin Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtFairchild, J.
The conflict between the jury’s finding that respondent was free from all negligence and the finding that twenty pér cent of the damages is attributable to his negligence in and of itself would not require the granting of a new trial. As was said in McGeehan v. Gaar, Scott & Co. 122 Wis. 630, 634, 100 N. W. 1072, where the effect of a question and answer contained in the special verdict entirely inconsistent with the answer to- a preceding question in the verdict was considered:
“To our minds the question is not important. The fifth question was only submitted to the jury in a certain…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Forbes v. ForbesWisconsin Supreme Court · 1938
- Bodden v. John H. Detter Coeeee Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1935
- McGeehan v. Gaar, Scott & Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1904
3Cited by3 opinions
- Laverne Krolikowski v. Allstate Insurance CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1960
- Statz v. PohlWisconsin Supreme Court · 1954
- Statz v. PohlWisconsin Supreme Court · 1954