Legal Opinion

Forbes v. Forbes

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided January 11, 1938PublishedCited by 24 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtFritz, J.

On this appeal the defendant’s first and second contentions are that as a matter of law the defendant was not negligent; and that the plaintiff cannot recover because she had assumed the risk of injury. The facts are not greatly in dispute. The plaintiff was injured when an automobile, in which she was a passenger and which the defendant was operating, rolled over a highway embankment, two hundred or three hundred feet west of the crest of a hill on which he, traveling westward, had passed an eastbound automobile. He was an experienced driver, and his speed of forty to forty-five miles per…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Alabama Great Southern Railroad v. CarrollSupreme Court of Alabama · 1892
  2. Howard v. . HowardSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1931
  3. Buckeye v. BuckeyeWisconsin Supreme Court · 1931
  4. Dawson v. DawsonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1931
  5. Fontaine v. FontaineWisconsin Supreme Court · 1931

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

3Cited by24 opinions

  1. Haumschild v. Continental Casualty Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1959
  2. Richard P. Watts, Administrator of the Estate of Ronald Arthur Storz, Deceased v. Pioneer Corn Company, Inc., and Harold J. GoodrichCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1965
  3. Statz v. PohlWisconsin Supreme Court · 1954
  4. Bencomo v. BencomoSupreme Court of Florida · 1967
  5. Pecor v. Home Indemnity Co. of New YorkWisconsin Supreme Court · 1940

19 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