Legal Opinion

Schroeder v. Kuntz

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided May 5, 1953PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBroadfoot, J.

The defendants contend that the trial court erred in failing to direct a verdict in their favor; that the plaintiff was negligent as a matter of law in respect to speed and lookout; that the plaintiff as a matter of law was at least as negligent as Kuntz; that the negligence, if any, on the part of Kuntz could not be a proximate cause of the collision; and that the damages are excessive.

On the other hand, the plaintiff contends that there was credible evidence to support the'findings of the jury on each issue, including the damages awarded; that the negligence of Kuntz was a proximate cause…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Leonard v. BottomleyWisconsin Supreme Court · 1933
  2. Johnson v. PrideauxWisconsin Supreme Court · 1922
  3. Guderyon v. Wisconsin Telephone Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1942
  4. Pietsch v. McCarthyWisconsin Supreme Court · 1915
  5. Mann v. Reliable Transit Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1935

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

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Ryan v. CameronWisconsin Supreme Court · 1955
  2. Jennings v. Mueller Transportation Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1955
  3. Vanderkarr v. BergsmaWisconsin Supreme Court · 1969
  4. Ruid v. DavisWisconsin Supreme Court · 1959
  5. Berg v. De GreefWisconsin Supreme Court · 1967

6 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