Legal Opinion

Lundgren v. Gimbel Bros.

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided January 11, 1927PublishedCited by 20 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

The following opinion was filed November 9, 1926:

Eschweiler, J.

No evidence was offered or contention made,'that the stairway in question was dangerous on account'of. being ¡unlighted or of. improper construction. Be*523cause there was no evidence showing that through any carelessness of any of defendant’s employees the slippery substance was spilled on the step and no evidence that it had been there, prior to plaintiff’s fall, any such appreciable length of timé that the defendant, in the exercise of ordinary care in the supervision of such matters, should have known of its existence and thereby…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Norton v. HudnerMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1913
  2. Graham v. F. W. Woolworth Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1925
  3. Zugbie v. J. R. Whipple Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1918
  4. Appel v. RuggaberWisconsin Supreme Court · 1923
  5. Kaszubowski v. Johnson Service Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1912

3Cited by20 opinions

  1. Johnson v. Wagner Provision Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1943
  2. May v. Skelley Oil Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1978
  3. Boutin v. Cardinal Theatre Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1954
  4. Pettric v. Gridley Dairy Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1930
  5. Barry v. Employers Mutual Casualty Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 2001

15 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