Legal Opinion

Pargeter v. Chicago & North Western Railway Co.

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided June 2, 1953PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtGehl, J.

Our conclusion that the court erred in finding as a matter of law that plaintiff was guilty of negligence in *252failing to stop before entering the crossing makes it unnecessary to recite more than we have of the facts.

Sec. 85.92 (1), Stats., provides as follows:

“(1) No operator of a vehicle shall drive on or across a grade crossing with the main-line tracks of any railroad or interurban railroad while any peace officer or railroad employee signals to stop; or while any warning device signals to stop, except that in the latter case if after stop and investigation he finds that no train or car is…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Hoffman v. Pittsburgh & Lake Erie R. RSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1923
  2. Noll v. NugentWisconsin Supreme Court · 1934
  3. Ayers v. Pittsburg, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Railway Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1902
  4. Gerg v. Pennsylvania RailroadSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1916
  5. Johnson v. Director General of RailroadsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1924

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Strahlendorf v. Walgreen Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1962
  2. Doyle v. Allstate InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1958
  3. Pargeter v. Chicago & North Western Railway Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1953
  4. Strahlendorf v. Walgreen Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1962

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API