Legal Opinion
Hall v. Arthur Overgaard, Inc.
Wisconsin Supreme Court
Decided June 30, 1972No. 109PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtWilkie, J.
A single issue is dispositive of this appeal: Did the trial court properly change the jury’s answer finding Strozinsky 40 percent causally negligent and find him not negligent as a matter of law? In Leatherman v. Garza, 1 this court extensively reviewed the criteria for passing upon a trial court’s decision to change an answer in a jury verdict:
“The proper test to be applied in determining whether a jury’s answer should be changed is ‘whether there was any credible evidence which supported the jury’s answer.’ Home Savings Bank v. Gertenbach (1955), 270 Wis. 386, 392, 71 N. W. 2d 347, 72 N. W.…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- DeKeyser v. Milwaukee Automobile InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1940
- Home Savings Bank v. GertenbachWisconsin Supreme Court · 1955
- Leatherman v. GarzaWisconsin Supreme Court · 1968
- Wintersberger v. Pioneer Iron & Metal Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1959
- Auster v. ZaspelWisconsin Supreme Court · 1955
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Management Computer Services, Inc. v. Hawkins, Ash, Baptie & Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1996
- Lueck v. City of JanesvilleWisconsin Supreme Court · 1973
- Dettmann v. FlanaryWisconsin Supreme Court · 1979