Fondow v. Milwaukee Electric Railway & Transport Co.
Wisconsin Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtBrown, J.
Plaintiff’s first contention is that the court erred “in failing to permit the jury to determine whether the plaintiff was a passenger or a trespasser.” If plaintiff deemed the question material a request for a question on that subject should have been made. There was no such request and no objection was made to-the special verdict without it. We have repeatedly stated that it is counsel’s responsibility to request the trial court to incorporate in the special verdict the questions which they want answered and at such-times we have directed attention to sec. 270.28, Stats., providing:
“When…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Hilker v. Western Automobile InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1931
- Nimits v. Motor Transport Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1948
- Stellmacher v. Wisco Hardware Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1951
- Smith v. BenjaminWisconsin Supreme Court · 1952
3Cited by8 opinions
- Deaton v. Unit Crane & Shovel Corp.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1953
- Briggs Transfer Co. v. Farmers Mutual Automobile InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1953
- Kreft v. CharlesWisconsin Supreme Court · 1954
- Gustavson v. Milwaukee & Suburban Transport Corp.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1971
- Minkel v. BibbeyWisconsin Supreme Court · 1953
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.