Home/Wisconsin Supreme Court/Potter v. Schleck

Potter v. Schleck

100 N.W.2d 559, 9 Wis. 2d 12, 1960 Wisc. LEXIS 282
CourtWisconsin Supreme Court
DecidedJanuary 5, 1960
StatusPublished
Cited by5 cases

This text of 100 N.W.2d 559 (Potter v. Schleck) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Wisconsin Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Potter v. Schleck, 100 N.W.2d 559, 9 Wis. 2d 12, 1960 Wisc. LEXIS 282 (Wis. 1960).

Opinion

Fairchild, J.

1. Order denying summary judgment. Defendant based his motion for summary judgment principally on a provision in the lease between defendant and plaintiff. Because the verdict supports the judgment in favor of defendant, and we reach the conclusion that the circuit court properly permitted the verdict to stand, it is unnecessary to consider the questions raised by defendant’s appeal from the order denying his motion for summary judgment, and that appeal will be dismissed as moot. For the purpose of taxation of costs, defendant will be considered the prevailing party.

2. Support for jury finding of no ice where plaintiff fell. Plaintiff claimed that he fell because he slipped on a strip of ice which lay across the sidewalk opposite the downspout. There is a conflict in the evidence as to (a) whether there was any ice opposite the downspout, and (b) whether he fell opposite the downspout. The jury’s negative answer to the first question would result from a negative finding upon either, or both of the propositions just mentioned.

Exhibit 33, herewith reproduced, is a photograph showing the area where plaintiff fell, although taken at a different season.

The downspout is attached to the west wall of the apartment building at the southwest corner. It discharges water onto a concrete splash block which runs south to the public sidewalk. The splash block is four and nine-tenths feet from north to south, and is one and three-tenths feet wide. Four and eight-tenths feet west of the west edge of the splash block is a concrete private walk, which runs north and south, and joins the public sidewalk at right angles. The private walk is three feet wide. From approximately one to three feet east of the splash block, there are some

*16 9mHKsAi9m7RM3337uipM

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Myers v. Cessna Aircraft Corporation
553 P.2d 355 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1976)
Kreyer v. FARMERS'CO-OPERATIVE LUMBER CO.
117 N.W.2d 646 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1962)
Kreyer v. Farmers' Co-operative Lumber Co.
18 Wis. 2d 67 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1962)
Kuehn v. Kuehn
104 N.W.2d 138 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1960)
Peterson v. Carter
182 F. Supp. 393 (W.D. Wisconsin, 1960)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
100 N.W.2d 559, 9 Wis. 2d 12, 1960 Wisc. LEXIS 282, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/potter-v-schleck-wis-1960.