Legal Opinion

Schultz v. Vick

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided April 5, 1960PublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtDieterich, J.

The issue in this case is whether defendants had a vested constitutional right in the statutory notice requirement under the provisions of sec. 330.19 (5), Stats. 1955, which provides:

“. . . No action to recover damages for an injury to the person shall be maintained unless, within two years after the happening of the event causing such damages, notice in writing, signed by the party damaged, . . . shall be served upon the person or corporation by whom it is claimed such damage was caused, ...”

This court has repeatedly construed the notice-of-injury provisions of sec. 330.19 (5), Stats., as a…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Chase Securities Corp. v. DonaldsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
  2. Donaldson v. Chase Securities Corp.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1943
  3. State Ex Rel. Sowle v. BrittichWisconsin Supreme Court · 1959
  4. Steffen v. LittleWisconsin Supreme Court · 1957
  5. Troschansky v. Milwaukee Electric Railway & Light Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1901

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

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. Haase v. SawickiWisconsin Supreme Court · 1963
  2. Wisconsin Bingo Supply & Equipment Co. v. Wisconsin Bingo Control BoardWisconsin Supreme Court · 1979
  3. State Ex Rel. Briggs & Stratton Corp. v. NollWisconsin Supreme Court · 1981
  4. Shaurette v. Capitol Erecting Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1964
  5. Grummitt v. Sturgeon Bay Winter Sports ClubDistrict Court, E.D. Wisconsin · 1961

10 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