Legal Opinion

Wenzel v. Werch

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided October 13, 1949No. Case 71; Case 72; Case 73PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBroadfoot, J.

Both Henry Wenzel and Clarence Wenzel upon their respective appeals contend that the trial court erred in the following respects: (1) In failing to submit to the jury a question of Christman’s negligence as to lookout; (2) in failing to frame a verdict which would permit the jury to find that Christman’s negligence caused the injuries to the Wenzels and not to the Werches; (3) in refusing to grant a directed verdict for the Wenzels, referring only questions as to their damages to the jury; (4) in its instructions to the jury relative to the negligence of Christman; (5) in refusing to grant…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Kellogg v. Chicago & Northwestern Railway Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1870
  2. Butts v. WardWisconsin Supreme Court · 1938
  3. Schumaker v. St. Paul & Duluth RailroadSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1891
  4. Kiviniemi v. American Mutual Liability InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1930
  5. Bourestom v. BourestomWisconsin Supreme Court · 1939

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Johnson v. HeintzWisconsin Supreme Court · 1976
  2. Caygill v. IpsenWisconsin Supreme Court · 1965
  3. Payne v. St. Louis Grain Corp.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1977
  4. Voigt v. RiestererCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1994
  5. Davis v. PoelmanLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1965

2 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