Legal Opinion

Johnson v. Heintz

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided December 21, 1973No. 219PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHeffernan, J.

The appellants, Gladys Heintz and American Family Mutual Insurance Company, contend that the trial court erred when it instructed the jury that, on the basis of the evidence, it could determine whether the injury occasioned by Emaline Johnson on August 12, 1969, when she fell while hanging out the clothes, was the natural result of the injury sustained in the automobile accident and permitted an award of additional compensation to be included in the damages attributable to the automobile accident.

Those appellants contend that it was improper for the jury to be allowed to consider these…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Bielski v. SchulzeWisconsin Supreme Court · 1962
  2. Cramer v. Theda Clark Memorial HospitalWisconsin Supreme Court · 1969
  3. Affett v. Milwaukee & Suburban Transport Corp.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1960
  4. Butzow v. Wausau Memorial HospitalWisconsin Supreme Court · 1971
  5. Farmers MA Ins. Co. v. Milwaukee A. Ins. Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1959

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

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Lambert v. StateWisconsin Supreme Court · 1976
  2. Gyldenvand v. SchroederWisconsin Supreme Court · 1979
  3. Johnson v. American Family Mutual InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1980
  4. Lemberger v. Koehring Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1974
  5. Hartford Fire Insurance v. Osborn Plumbing & Heating, Inc.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1975

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