Legal Opinion

Meyer v. Mutual Service Casualty Insurance

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided March 7, 1961PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHallows, J.

On this appeal, two questions are raised: (1) Did the court err in directing a verdict for Meidl and his insurer absolving Meidl from negligence under the emergency doctrine, and (2) did the court err in not admitting in evidence a written statement taken by an employee of the Herman Mutual Insurance Company from Johnson?

A review of the pertinent facts is necessary. Highway 41 at the point of impact is 22 feet wide with shoulders on both sides wide enough for the width of a car. It was daylight, visibility was excellent and the road was dry. About a half mile north of the scene of the…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Truelsch v. MillerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1925
  2. Hoehne v. MittelstadtWisconsin Supreme Court · 1948
  3. Klas v. FenskeWisconsin Supreme Court · 1946
  4. Havens v. HavensWisconsin Supreme Court · 1954
  5. Musha v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1960

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. State v. BuelowCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1984
  2. State v. JohnsonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1973
  3. Merlino v. Mutual Service Casualty InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1964
  4. State v. PepinCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1982
  5. Ashley v. American Automobile InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1963

2 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