Legal Opinion

Brown v. Haertel

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided October 11, 1932PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtOwen, J.

This is a companion case to that of Marion Brown against the same defendants, decided herewith (ante, p. 345, 244 N. W. 630). John Brown was the owner of the car which was being driven by his wife, Marion Brown. He brings this action to recover damages sustained by his automobile as a result of the collision. While the record does not disclose tangible evidence from which it can be determined whether the car was driven by Marion Brown upon his business so that, while driving the car, she was acting as his agent, upon the doctrine of Enea v. Pfister, 180 Wis. 329, 192 N. W. 1018, it must be so…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Enea v. PfisterWisconsin Supreme Court · 1923
  2. Brown v. HaertelWisconsin Supreme Court · 1932

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. McGuiggan v. HillerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1932
  2. Schmidt v. LearyWisconsin Supreme Court · 1934
  3. Sevey v. JonesWisconsin Supreme Court · 1940
  4. Brennan v. Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul & Pacific RailroadWisconsin Supreme Court · 1936

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

Powered by the Exa API