Legal Opinion

Hanley v. Milwaukee Electric Railway & Light Co.

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided February 4, 1936PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

*283The following opinion was filed December 3, 1935 :

Fowuer, J.

The defendant claims that its motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict should have been granted because the jury’s findings respecting'the jerking of the streetcar in stopping are not supported by the evidence. Its contention is that there is no negligence unless the jerking of the car was unusual, and that statements of witnesses that it was unusual are not sufficient to support a finding to that effect, unless they are accompanied by evidence of physical facts showing that it was so. While there are cases holding, as stated…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Osborne v. MontgomeryWisconsin Supreme Court · 1930
  2. Consolidated Traction Co. v. ThalheimerSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1896
  3. Rystinki v. Central California Traction Co.California Supreme Court · 1917
  4. Hamus v. WeberWisconsin Supreme Court · 1929
  5. Otto v. Milwaukee Northern Railway Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1912

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

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Roeske v. SchmittWisconsin Supreme Court · 1954
  2. Spleas v. Milwaukee & Suburban Transport Corp.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1963
  3. Pecor v. Home Indemnity Co. of New YorkWisconsin Supreme Court · 1940
  4. McGaw v. WassmannWisconsin Supreme Court · 1953
  5. Edith P. Reitan v. Travelers Indemnity CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1959

9 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