Legal Opinion

Eckel v. Richter

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided December 7, 1926PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtRosenberry, J.

The defendant contends, first, that the plaintiff was guilty of contributory negligence as a matter *412of law. Without reciting the evidence at length, it is sufficient to say that there was a clear conflict in the evidence. If the jury had believed the evidence which was offered to sustain the defendant’s claims, they might well have found for the defendant. On the other hand, if they believed the evidence offered to sustain the claim of the plaintiff, there was ample evidence to sustain that finding. Under such circumstances the court cannot say as a matter of law that the plaintiff was guilty…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Firemen's Fund Insurance v. SchreiberWisconsin Supreme Court · 1912
  2. Thomas v. Lockwood Oil Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1921
  3. Seidl v. KnopWisconsin Supreme Court · 1921

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Olsen v. MooreWisconsin Supreme Court · 1972
  2. Olson v. ConnerlyWisconsin Supreme Court · 1990
  3. Nash-Kelvinator Corp. v. Industrial CommissionWisconsin Supreme Court · 1954
  4. Sheboygan Airways, Inc. v. Industrial CommissionWisconsin Supreme Court · 1932
  5. Peterman v. Industrial CommissionWisconsin Supreme Court · 1938

7 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