FITZPATRICK v. RICE


273 Wis. 201 (1956)

FITZPATRICK, Appellant, vs. RICE and another, Respondents.

Supreme Court of Wisconsin.

June 5, 1956.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

For the appellant there was a brief by Allan Cain of Kaukauna, attorney, and Henry P. Hughes of Oshkosh of counsel, and oral argument by Mr. Hughes.

For the respondents there was a brief by Benton, Bosser, Fulton, Menn & Nehs of Appleton, and oral argument by David L. Fulton.


MARTIN, J.

In its decision on motions after verdict the trial court stated:

"The court has referred to the problem created by defendant's after-verdict motion as a simple one, when in fact it is one of the most troublesome that has been presented to the court for some time. The difficulty arises in determining whether there is any reasonable inference, from the evidence introduced, to sustain the jury verdict or whether such verdict is based on conjecture...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases