Catura v. Romanofsky
Wisconsin Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtBroadfoot, J.
Many assignments of error are raised by the appellants. Two of these will be sufficient to demonstrate the need for a new trial in these actions. The first has to do with the form of the special verdict. Question One thereof inquired as to the negligence of the defendant Romanofsky in the manner of operating his automobile. Question Two thereof was the usual causation question as to Romanofsky in case the jury had found he was negligent by its answers to question One. Questions Three and Four were similar questions inquiring as to the negligence and causation with respect to the manner in…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Olson v. HermansenWisconsin Supreme Court · 1928
- Lang v. BaumannWisconsin Supreme Court · 1933
3Cited by6 opinions
- Zweck v. D P Way Corp.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1975
- Dostal v. Saint Paul-Mercury Indemnity Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1958
- Sandley v. PilsnerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1955
- United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. Tribunal Superior de Puerto RicoSupreme Court of Puerto Rico · 1962
- Stanley v. Milwaukee Automobile InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1956
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.