Legal Opinion

Philip v. Schlager

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided March 6, 1934PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtFairchild, J.

Upon the appeal of Haubrich the judgment below must be affirmed. The evidence clearly shows negligence on his part. His contention that the negligence of the deceased was greater than that found by the jury is without merit. Philip was standing by the side of his car. Plaubrich in passing struck a man who was in the rear of the car, hit the car itself, and Philip. He drove on for some distance without stopping. When he did stop he observed that his front light was bent, that a man’s cap was on his running board, and said to his companion that he would not go back because it would only mean…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Enea v. PfisterWisconsin Supreme Court · 1923
  2. Boucher v. Wisconsin Central Railway Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1909
  3. Serdan v. Falk Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1913

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Bradley v. S. L. Savidge, Inc.Washington Supreme Court · 1942
  2. Archer v. Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul & Pacific RailroadWisconsin Supreme Court · 1934
  3. Capello's Admr. v. Aero Mayflower Transit Co.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1949
  4. Van Gilder v. GugelWisconsin Supreme Court · 1936
  5. Darian v. McGrathSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1943

8 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