Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
8 Wisconsin opinions name it 2 courts 1925–2015 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Wisconsin courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Weborg v. Jennygreen1 sentence2015In Weborg , a medical malpractice case, our supreme court concluded the circuit court erred by modifying the standard jury instruction on expert opinion testimony to state that the jury was not bound by any expert's opinion "except with regard to the standard of care exercised by medical doctors." Weborg, 341 Wis. 2d 668, ¶¶ 31, 73 . | 1 | 1 |
Boyde v. Californiagreen1 sentence1996See id. at 378, 383 . rH hH Before applying the reasonable likelihood standard to the case at hand, we consider the relationship between the § 940.09 affirmative defense and the contributory negligence rule of § 939.14, because this issue understandably caused confusion during the trial. | 1 | 1 |
Employers Insurance of Wausau v. Sheedygreen2 sentences1984Under the rule that a subrogee stands in the same position as its subrogors and can assert only such rights as the subrogors had and is subject to the same defenses, see Employers Insurance of Wausau v. Sheedy, 42 Wis. 2d 161, 164-65 , 166 N.W.2d 220, 222 (1969), the accountants are not without a remedy that will afford a just and equitable result in this case. 1984Under the rule that a subrogee stands in the same position as its subrogors and can assert only such rights as the subrogors had and is subject to the same defenses, see Employers Insurance of Wausau v. Sheedy, 42 Wis. 2d 161, 164-65 , 166 N.W.2d 220, 222 (1969), the accountants are not without a remedy that will afford a just and equitable result in this case. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Wisconsin. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Connar v. West Shore Equipment of Milwaukee, Inc.
green
2 sentences2006In Connar v. West Shore Equip., 68 Wis. 2d 42, 45 , 227 N.W.2d 660 (1975), the supreme court stated: "Only one question must be affirmatively answered by the trial judge before submitting a negligence question to the jury: Is there evidence of conduct *510 which, if believed by the jury, would constitute negligence on the part of the person or other legal entity inquired about." Thus, the healthcare providers assert, a contributory negligence instruction was warranted because a reasonable jury could find that Zak was contributorily negligent based on his conduct following his discharge. ¶ 11. 2006In Connar v. West Shore Equip., 68 Wis. 2d 42, 45 , 227 N.W.2d 660 (1975), the supreme court stated: "Only one question must be affirmatively answered by the trial judge before submitting a negligence question to the jury: Is there evidence of conduct *510 which, if believed by the jury, would constitute negligence on the part of the person or other legal entity inquired about." Thus, the healthcare providers assert, a contributory negligence instruction was warranted because a reasonable jury could find that Zak was contributorily negligent based on his conduct following his discharge. ¶ 11. | 1 | 2006–2006 |
Vogel v. Grant-Lafayette Electric Cooperative
green
2 sentences1996The jury responded in the negative. [12] That this remains a significant, unresolved legal issue was confirmed when the supreme court recently identified but declined to "address the issue of whether a nuisance based on an intentional invasion is subject to a contributory negligence defense." Vogel, 201 Wis. 2d at 434 n.6, 548 N.W.2d at 837 n.6. [13] At oral argument Grace also contended that entry of the reduced judgment was "automatic by operation of law" and, in both argument and brief, maintained that, under § 805.14(5)(a), STATS., no motion was required. 1996The jury responded in the negative. [12] That this remains a significant, unresolved legal issue was confirmed when the supreme court recently identified but declined to "address the issue of whether a nuisance based on an intentional invasion is subject to a contributory negligence defense." Vogel, 201 Wis. 2d at 434 n.6, 548 N.W.2d at 837 n.6. [13] At oral argument Grace also contended that entry of the reduced judgment was "automatic by operation of law" and, in both argument and brief, maintained that, under § 805.14(5)(a), STATS., no motion was required. | 1 | 1996–1996 |
Vincent v. Pabst Brewing Co.
green
2 sentences1991Id. at 131 , 177 N.W.2d at 518 . 1991Id. at 131 , 177 N.W.2d at 518 . | 1 | 1991–1991 |
Maryland Casualty Co. v. Industrial Commission
neutral
1 sentence1957Western Casualty & Surety Co. v. Shafton, 231 Wis. 1 , 283 N. W. 806 , 285 N. W. 408 ; Employers Mut. | 1 | 1957–1957 |
Western Casualty & Surety Co. v. Shafton
neutral
1 sentence1957Western Casualty & Surety Co. v. Shafton, 231 Wis. 1 , 283 N. W. 806 , 285 N. W. 408 ; Employers Mut. | 1 | 1957–1957 |
Tesch v. Milwaukee Electric Railway & Light Co.
green
2 sentences1925Co. 108 Wis. 593, 602 , 84 N. W. 823 , to wit: “The doctrine of contributory negligence applied here has the sanction of the common law from time immemorial, the support of most of the courts and standard text-writers, and half a century of the adjudications of this court. 1925Co. 108 Wis. 593, 602 , 84 N. W. 823 , to wit: “The doctrine of contributory negligence applied here has the sanction of the common law from time immemorial, the support of most of the courts and standard text-writers, and half a century of the adjudications of this court. | 1 | 1925–1925 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.