Meyer v. Fronimades
Wisconsin Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtMartin, C. J.
A new trial must be had in the interests of justice.
It should be noted at the outset that the question submitted to the jury on compensatory damages was a “catchall;” it did not separate pain and suffering from loss of earnings, and hence it is impossible to know how the jury arrived at its answer or how the court arrived at its reduced figure.
Plaintiff testified that he sustained a cut on his forehead;, that after the fight he washed off the blood, went to bed, and in the morning tied his head up and took some aspirin; that “I have awful headaches sometimes and when I lift heavy then I have…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Hallum v. Village of OmroWisconsin Supreme Court · 1904
- State v. Industrial CommissionWisconsin Supreme Court · 1956
3Cited by18 opinions
- Michalski v. WagnerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1960
- Pucci v. RauschWisconsin Supreme Court · 1971
- ECO, Inc. v. City of ElkhornCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 2002
- State v. StraehlerCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 2007
- Insurance Co. of North America v. Cease Electric Inc.Court of Appeals of Wisconsin · 2003
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.