Braatz v. Continental Casualty Co.
Wisconsin Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtSteinle, J.
The trial court was of a mind that the jury’s findings were against the preponderance of the evidence, and, principally on that ground, directed that the verdict be set aside. Appellants contend that the trial court was in error in discarding the verdict on such basis. They *483maintain that the proper test in determining a motion to set aside a verdict is whether there was any credible evidence which supported the jury’s answers. Appellants are correct in that contention. A trial court should not assume to^ set aside a verdict when its ruling would require it to pass upon the credibility of…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Trautmann v. Charles Schefft & Sons Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1930
- Olson v. Milwaukee Automobile InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1954
- Cleary v. EckartWisconsin Supreme Court · 1926
- Olson v. HermansenWisconsin Supreme Court · 1928
- Eisenhut v. EisenhutWisconsin Supreme Court · 1933
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by20 opinions
- Zillmer v. MiglautschWisconsin Supreme Court · 1967
- Clark v. Quality Dairy CompanySupreme Court of Missouri · 1966
- City of Milwaukee v. BichelWisconsin Supreme Court · 1967
- Mainz v. LundWisconsin Supreme Court · 1963
- Tombal v. Farmers Insurance ExchangeWisconsin Supreme Court · 1974
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.