Bishop v. Johnson
Wisconsin Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtHallows, J.
Bishop contends he was free from contributory negligence as a matter of law but if he were negligent, the comparison of his negligence with that of Johnson was properly a determination for the jury to make and the question should not have been decided as a matter of law by the court. Johnson contends Bishop was at least 50 percent contributorily negligent as a matter of law and he was negligent per se because he violated a criminal law and contributed to the defendant’s condition, which caused the accident.
We need not decide whether Bishop was or was not negligent as a matter of law; at least…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- McConville v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1962
- Davis v. SkilleWisconsin Supreme Court · 1961
- Baumgarten v. JonesWisconsin Supreme Court · 1963
- McCauley v. International Trading Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1954
- Theisen v. Milwaukee Automobile Mutual InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1962
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Stewart v. WulfWisconsin Supreme Court · 1978
- Loomans v. Milwaukee Mutual InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1968
- Sambs v. City of BrookfieldWisconsin Supreme Court · 1975
- Liebe v. City Finance CompanyCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1980
- Pruss v. StrubeWisconsin Supreme Court · 1968
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.