Legal Opinion
Kaslo v. Hahn
Wisconsin Supreme Court
Decided October 3, 1967PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtBeilfuss, J.
The parties agree that at the time of the accident the plaintiff was a social guest of the defendant and as such that the legal status between the parties was that of licensee-licensor.
In Szafranski v. Radetzky (1966), 31 Wis. 2d 119, 126, 141 N. W. 2d 902, this court said:
“The decisions of this court hold that the possessor or occupier of premises may be liable for injuries to the licensee in two situations. The licensor may be liable because the injury was caused by a ‘trap’ on the premises. Greenfield v. Miller (1921), 173 Wis. 184, 187, 180 N. W. 834, 12 A. L. R. 982; Cordula v. Dietrich…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Greenfield v. MillerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1921
- Szafranski v. RadetzkyWisconsin Supreme Court · 1966
- Muench v. HeinemannWisconsin Supreme Court · 1903
- Brinilson v. Chicago & Northwestern Railway Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1911
- Theisen v. Milwaukee Automobile Mutual InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1962
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- LePoidevin Ex Rel. Dye v. WilsonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1983
- Terpstra v. Soiltest, Inc.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1974
- Mariuzza v. KenowerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1975
- Flintrop v. LefcoWisconsin Supreme Court · 1971
- Strelecki v. Firemans Insurance Co. of NewarkWisconsin Supreme Court · 1979
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.