Turtenwald v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.
Wisconsin Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtBeilfuss, J.
Although not stated precisely in this manner by the parties, the issues are:
1. Was it error to give a res ipsa loquitur instruction to the jury?
2. Was it error to strike the testimony of a witness recalled after he said his memory was refreshed?
3. Are the damages excessive?
The following conditions must be present before the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur is applicable: (1) The event or accident in question be of the kind which does not ordinarily occur in the absence of someone’s negligence; and (2) the agency or instrumentality causing the harm must have been within the exclusive control of…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Turk v. H. C. Prange Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1963
- Fehrman v. SmirlWisconsin Supreme Court · 1964
- Utica Mutual Insurance v. Ripon CooperativeWisconsin Supreme Court · 1971
- Welch v. NeisiusWisconsin Supreme Court · 1967
- Mixis v. Wisconsin Public Service Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1965
3Cited by27 opinions
- Lambrecht v. Estate of KaczmarczykWisconsin Supreme Court · 2001
- Mary Kicklighter v. Nails by Jannee, Inc., Mary Kicklighter v. Nails by Jannee, Inc., and Third-Party v. Kay-See Dental Manufacturing Co., Third-PartyCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1980
- Hoven v. KelbleWisconsin Supreme Court · 1977
- FGA, INC. v. GiglioNevada Supreme Court · 2012
- Wilson v. Continental Insurance CompaniesWisconsin Supreme Court · 1979
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.