Legal Opinion

Forecki v. Kohlberg

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided October 8, 1940PublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

The following opinion was filed December 3, 1940 :

Martin, J.

The substance of the several assignments of error is as follows: (1) That the court erred in permitting Robert A. Hess, attorney for both plaintiffs, and Arthur Wickham, of counsel to Robert Hess in the Zaleski case, to represent adverse interests on the trial of the action; (2) that the court erred in permitting Mr. Wickham to cross-examine the plaintiff Forecki and to thereby elicit from him evidence bearing on his assumption of risk so far as his legal relationship to the deceased Zaleski was concerned; (3) that the court erred in…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Young v. Nunn, Bush & Weldon Shoe Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1933
  2. Michel v. McKennaWisconsin Supreme Court · 1929
  3. Harter v. DickmanWisconsin Supreme Court · 1932
  4. Harvey v. HarveyWisconsin Supreme Court · 1930
  5. Schwab v. MartinWisconsin Supreme Court · 1938

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

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. Foley-Ciccantelli v. Bishop's Grove Condominium Ass'nWisconsin Supreme Court · 2011
  2. Riley v. BradleySupreme Court of Alabama · 1948
  3. In Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings Against MarineWisconsin Supreme Court · 1978
  4. Lind v. LundWisconsin Supreme Court · 1954
  5. Davis v. PoelmanLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1965

10 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