Ruid v. Davis
Wisconsin Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtHallows, J.
The first question is whether Davis was causally negligent as to speed as a matter of law. To pass on this question it is necessary to review the material evidence on how the accident happened from the standpoint most favorable to Davis, because he was absolved of any negligence by the jury. Zang v. Schumann (1952), 262 Wis. 570, 55 N. W. (2d) 864; Henthorn v. M. G. C. Corp. (1957), 1 Wis. (2d) 180, 83 N. W. (2d) 759.
Davis testified he was going 40 to 45 miles an hour when he first noticed the fog bank. He was traveling about 35 miles an hour when he entered the fog and applied his brakes to…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Lauson v. Town of Fond du LacWisconsin Supreme Court · 1909
- Henthorn v. M. G. C. Corp.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1957
- Knipfer v. ShawWisconsin Supreme Court · 1933
- Guderyon v. Wisconsin Telephone Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1942
- Reuhl v. UszlerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1949
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Bielski v. SchulzeWisconsin Supreme Court · 1962
- Dickman v. SchaefferWisconsin Supreme Court · 1960
- Rodenkirch v. JohnsonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1960
- St. Paul Fire & Marine Insurance v. BurchardWisconsin Supreme Court · 1964
- Guinther v. SchuchtWisconsin Supreme Court · 1965
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.