Hilsenhoff v. Fass
Wisconsin Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of tbe circuit court for Dane county: E. Ray SteveNS, Circuit Judge. Action to recover for personal injuries. The plaintiff, on October 17, 1911, while operating a jointer machine and in the employ of the defendants, was injured. The negligence alleged is that'the defendants failed to furnish a safe place for plaintiff to work, failed to keep such place safe, and failed to guard said machinery.
Read the full summary
Appeal from a judgment of tbe circuit court for Dane county: E. Ray SteveNS, Circuit Judge. Action to recover for personal injuries. The plaintiff, on October 17, 1911, while operating a jointer machine and in the employ of the defendants, was injured. The negligence alleged is that'the defendants failed to furnish a safe place for plaintiff to work, failed to keep such place safe, and failed to guard said machinery. The jury returned the following verdict: “(1) Were the knives of the jointer so located as to be dangerous to employees in the discharge of their duty? A. Yes. “(2) If you answer…
1Opinion of the CourtKebwiN, J.
The errors assigned are (a) in instructing the jury; (b) in refusing to direct judgment on the verdict for the plaintiff; (c) in refusing to set aside the verdict and grant a new trial; (d) in ordering the complaint dismissed.
As we have seen, the jury found that the plaintiff was guilty of contributory negligence. Notwithstanding this *630finding it is insisted on tbe part of tbe appellant tbat judgment should have been directed for the plaintiff upon the verdict. This contention is based upon the theory that under the law as it stood at the time of the injury the defendants were absolutely…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Willette v. Rhinelander Paper Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1911
- West v. Bayfield Mill Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1910
3Cited by2 opinions
- Banaszek v. F. Mayer Boot & Shoe Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1915
- Krueck v. Phoenix Chair Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1914