8 Wisconsin opinions name it 2 courts 2001–2026 2 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 |
|---|---|---|
Lambrecht v. Estate of Kaczmarczykgreen2 sentences2023We conclude that res ipsa loquitor does not apply and that Rembalski has not proven the elements of a negligence claim. 3 No. 2022AP1154 ¶10 “Res ipsa loquitur is a rule of circumstantial evidence that permits a fact- finder to infer a defendant’s negligence from the mere occurrence of the event.” Lambrecht v. Estate of Kaczmarczyk, 2001 WI 25, ¶33 , 241 Wis. 2d 804 , 623 N.W.2d 751 . 2023We conclude that res ipsa loquitor does not apply and that Rembalski has not proven the elements of a negligence claim. 3 No. 2022AP1154 ¶10 “Res ipsa loquitur is a rule of circumstantial evidence that permits a fact- finder to infer a defendant’s negligence from the mere occurrence of the event.” Lambrecht v. Estate of Kaczmarczyk, 2001 WI 25, ¶33 , 241 Wis. 2d 804 , 623 N.W.2d 751 . | 1 | 2 |
Citizens State Bank v. Timm, Schmidt & Co.green1 sentence2026See id. (“[N]egligence and liability are distinct 22 No. 2023AP1709 concepts.” (citation omitted)); Citizens, 113 Wis. 2d at 387 (stating that “policy factors preclude the imposition of liability for negligent acts” (emphasis added)). | 1 | 1 |
Stephenson v. Universal Metrics, Inc.green2 sentences2006See Stephenson v. Universal Metrics, Inc., 2002 WI 30, ¶ 42 , 251 Wis. 2d 171 , 641 N.W.2d 158 ("Even if a plaintiff is able to establish all of the elements of a negligence claim, public policy considerations may dictate against a finding of liability."). 2006See Stephenson v. Universal Metrics, Inc., 2002 WI 30, ¶ 42 , 251 Wis. 2d 171 , 641 N.W.2d 158 ("Even if a plaintiff is able to establish all of the elements of a negligence claim, public policy considerations may dictate against a finding of liability."). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Wisconsin. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Gritzner v. Michael R.
green
2 sentences2011Gritzner, 235 Wis. 2d 781, ¶¶ 26-27 . 2002Gritzner, 2000 WI 68, ¶ 26 . | 3 | 2001–2011 |
Hoida, Inc. v. M & I MIDSTATE BANK
green
2 sentences2026Friends of Kenwood v. Green, 2000 WI App 217, ¶11 , 239 Wis. 2d 78 , 619 N.W.2d 271 . ¶16 In Wisconsin, the elements of a negligence claim are “(1) the existence of a duty of care on the part of the defendant, (2) a breach of that duty of care, (3) a causal connection between the defendant’s breach of the duty of care and the plaintiff’s injury, and (4) actual loss or damage resulting from the [breach].” Hoida, Inc. v. M&I Midstate Bank, 2006 WI 69, ¶23 , 291 Wis. 2d 283 , 717 N.W.2d 17 (alteration in original; citation omitted); Gorton v. American 6 On appeal, PwC asserts several alternative 2026Friends of Kenwood v. Green, 2000 WI App 217, ¶11 , 239 Wis. 2d 78 , 619 N.W.2d 271 . ¶16 In Wisconsin, the elements of a negligence claim are “(1) the existence of a duty of care on the part of the defendant, (2) a breach of that duty of care, (3) a causal connection between the defendant’s breach of the duty of care and the plaintiff’s injury, and (4) actual loss or damage resulting from the [breach].” Hoida, Inc. v. M&I Midstate Bank, 2006 WI 69, ¶23 , 291 Wis. 2d 283 , 717 N.W.2d 17 (alteration in original; citation omitted); Gorton v. American 6 On appeal, PwC asserts several alternative | 1 | 2026–2026 |
Friends of Kenwood v. Green
green
2 sentences2026Friends of Kenwood v. Green, 2000 WI App 217, ¶11 , 239 Wis. 2d 78 , 619 N.W.2d 271 . ¶16 In Wisconsin, the elements of a negligence claim are “(1) the existence of a duty of care on the part of the defendant, (2) a breach of that duty of care, (3) a causal connection between the defendant’s breach of the duty of care and the plaintiff’s injury, and (4) actual loss or damage resulting from the [breach].” Hoida, Inc. v. M&I Midstate Bank, 2006 WI 69, ¶23 , 291 Wis. 2d 283 , 717 N.W.2d 17 (alteration in original; citation omitted); Gorton v. American 6 On appeal, PwC asserts several alternative 2026Friends of Kenwood v. Green, 2000 WI App 217, ¶11 , 239 Wis. 2d 78 , 619 N.W.2d 271 . ¶16 In Wisconsin, the elements of a negligence claim are “(1) the existence of a duty of care on the part of the defendant, (2) a breach of that duty of care, (3) a causal connection between the defendant’s breach of the duty of care and the plaintiff’s injury, and (4) actual loss or damage resulting from the [breach].” Hoida, Inc. v. M&I Midstate Bank, 2006 WI 69, ¶23 , 291 Wis. 2d 283 , 717 N.W.2d 17 (alteration in original; citation omitted); Gorton v. American 6 On appeal, PwC asserts several alternative | 1 | 2026–2026 |
Martindale v. Ripp
green
2 sentences2023“In making evidentiary rulings, the circuit court has broad discretion.” Martindale v. Ripp, 2001 WI 113, ¶28 , 246 Wis. 2d 67 , 629 N.W.2d 698 . 2023“In making evidentiary rulings, the circuit court has broad discretion.” Martindale v. Ripp, 2001 WI 113, ¶28 , 246 Wis. 2d 67 , 629 N.W.2d 698 . | 1 | 2023–2023 |
Miller v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.
green
1 sentence2002It is often repeated that even when the elements of a negligence claim have been established, a court may nonetheless preclude liability based on "public policy." E.g., Miller, 219 Wis. 2d at 264 . | 1 | 2002–2002 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
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.