Legal Opinion

Rude v. Algiers

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided November 1, 1960PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtCurrie, J.

The defendants raise the following issues before this court:(1) Is Algiers entitled to the benefit of the emergency rule as a matter of law, in view of the jury’s failure to find that he was negligent with respect to position on the highway, thus requiring that the jury’s finding that he was causally negligent with respect to management and control be set aside ?(2) Do certain rulings of the trial court during the conduct of the trial constitute prejudicial error so as to require that there be a new trial of the Rude action if the defendants do not prevail upon the first issue ?(3) Are the…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Diemel v. WeirichWisconsin Supreme Court · 1953
  2. Martell v. KlingmanWisconsin Supreme Court · 1960
  3. Papacosta v. PapacostaWisconsin Supreme Court · 1957
  4. Schultz v. CulbertsonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1905
  5. Hayden v. CareyWisconsin Supreme Court · 1924

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

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Kraemer Bros. v. United States Fire InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1979
  2. Harris v. StateWisconsin Supreme Court · 1977
  3. Schumacher v. KlabundeWisconsin Supreme Court · 1963
  4. Cook v. ThomasWisconsin Supreme Court · 1964
  5. Yellow River Improvement Co. v. ArnoldWisconsin Supreme Court · 1879

5 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