Legal Opinion

Erdmann v. Wolfe

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided February 2, 1960PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtFairchild, J.

Three questions are presented: (1) Was the $5,000 allowance for personal injuries excessive? (2) Did the county court correctly determine, as a matter of law, that Miss Erdmann was not causally negligent? (3) If not, is a new trial required ?

1. Damages. Miss Erdmann testified that after the collision, she experienced terrible pain; that she was taken to the emergency room at the hospital in Sturgeon Bay, where Dr. Dorchester sewed up lacerations in her forehead, chin, and left knee. She was taken to her home in Green Bay the following day, and was in bed or on a couch there for a couple of…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Statz v. PohlWisconsin Supreme Court · 1954
  2. Auster v. ZaspelWisconsin Supreme Court · 1955
  3. Laughnan v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1957
  4. Korpela v. RedlinWisconsin Supreme Court · 1958
  5. Winston v. WeinerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1958

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

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Johnson v. HeintzWisconsin Supreme Court · 1976
  2. Mustas v. INLAND CONSTRUCTION, INC.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1963
  3. Westfall Ex Rel. Terwilliger v. KottkeWisconsin Supreme Court · 1983
  4. Jahnke v. SmithWisconsin Supreme Court · 1973
  5. Korleski v. LaneWisconsin Supreme Court · 1960

3 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