Legal Opinion

Niesen v. State

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided April 12, 1966PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtGordon, J.

Although sec. 88.38 (2), Stats., was repealed by the session laws of 1963, the repealing statute was not effective until June 13, 1964. It is clear that Mr. Niesen’s cause of action arose prior to the effective date of the new statute.

Mr. Niesen was entitled to pursue a cause of action for damages if sec. 88.38 (2), Stats., governed. The appellant contends, however, that sec. 88.87, which was adopted by ch, 572, Laws of 1963, both abolished sec. 88.38 (2) and obliterated the right of Mr. Niesen to seek damages in his complaint.

The trial court concluded that the plaintiff’s rights are governed…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Dillon v. LinderWisconsin Supreme Court · 1874
  2. Will of Robinson v. RobinsonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1935
  3. Waddell v. MamatWisconsin Supreme Court · 1955
  4. Miller v. Chicago & Northwestern Railway Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1907
  5. H. W. Wright Lumber Co. v. HixonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1899

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

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Jackson County Iron Co. v. MusolfWisconsin Supreme Court · 1986
  2. Lands' End, Inc. v. City of DodgevilleWisconsin Supreme Court · 2016
  3. State v. MacArthurWisconsin Supreme Court · 2008
  4. Truesdale v. StateWisconsin Supreme Court · 1973
  5. Trinity Petroleum, Inc. v. Scott Oil Co.Court of Appeals of Wisconsin · 2006

7 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