Edward T. Fairchild

This case concerns a claim arising from alleged conduct that interfered with a marital relationship while a divorce action was pending between the spouses. The plaintiff filed the action within one year of the events, but the defendant demurred, arguing the claim was untimely or that no cause existed due to the separation. The court reasoned that marital status persists until formally terminated by a divorce judgment, and the pleadings allowed for the possibility that the couple might reconcile, making the timing appropriate under the limitation period. The trial court overruled the demurrer, and the appellate court affirmed that order.

family lawproceduretorts & liability

This case arose from a fatal car accident in which a guest passenger, Gary Paul, was killed when the driver, Gerald Hodd, lost control of the vehicle on a slippery road while attempting to pass another car. The jury found Hodd causally negligent in his management and control of the car and in failing to exercise the driving skill he possessed, rejecting arguments that the accident was unavoidable due to skidding or that the guest assumed the risk. The court held that credible evidence supported the jury's liability findings and that the trial court properly refused to submit an assumption-of-risk question. On damages, however, the court determined that the award for loss of services was excessive and reduced it from $6,400 to $1,716, ordering a new trial on damages unless the plaintiffs stipulated to the lower amount.

torts & liabilityprocedure

This case arose from a car accident in which driver Bryle Burnette sped through a dead-end intersection without stopping at an arterial sign and struck a telephone pole and guy wire, injuring passenger Agatha Leiterman. The plaintiffs requested special verdict questions on management and control due to untimely speed reduction and failure to stop at the sign, but the trial court omitted them, submitting only speed and lookout instead; the jury found Burnette negligent as to speed (causal) but not lookout, and found Leiterman assumed the risk and was also negligent. The Wisconsin Supreme Court affirmed the resulting judgment, holding that management and control was not a separate issue because Burnette braked upon seeing the danger and that undisputed facts plus the jury findings on speed and lookout resolved the case without need for additional questions.

torts & liabilityprocedure

This case concerned a trust created in 1928 by Julia G. Boyle, which provided income to her son Francis H. Boyle until her death, later modified in 1931 with his consent to extend the payment period and add provisions for his children. After Julia's will and codicil expressly excluded adopted children from the definition of "issue," Francis's adopted children claimed beneficiary status under the trust. The court affirmed the lower court's order denying their claim, holding that Julia remained the sole settlor whose intent controlled the trust's construction, the modification did not make Francis a cosettlor, and her expressed exclusion of adopted children applied. The court reasoned that adoption statutes are strictly construed against extending rights to third parties uninvolved in the adoption and that surrounding circumstances confirmed Julia's intent to limit beneficiaries to blood relatives.

family lawproperty

This case concerned a charitable trust created under a will for the Dane County Humane Society to fund its work preventing cruelty to animals, children, and other groups, with the trust terms set by a 1916-1917 judgment. An erroneous 1939 county court order terminated the trust and distributed its assets, but a later 1943 order vacated that termination; the 1953 judgment under review upheld the correction. The court held that the attorney general, representing the public interest in charitable trusts, could challenge the 1939 order at any time due to lack of notice, and that the judgment properly restored the trust to its original administration. The decision affirmed the 1953 judgment on that basis, noting the trustee lacked standing after discharge but the attorney general did not.

propertyprocedure

The case involved a worker's compensation claim by Peter P. Keller against his employer, International Harvester Company, seeking additional benefits for alleged permanent partial disability from a 1949 workplace fall. The Industrial Commission found that Keller did not sustain any permanent disability as a result of the injury, a determination upheld by the trial court. The Wisconsin Supreme Court affirmed the judgment, reasoning that the commission's findings of fact are conclusive if supported by any credible evidence, and here medical testimony from company doctors indicated no permanent disability and a lack of continuity between the original injury and later back complaints. The court noted that disputes in medical expert opinions are for the commission to resolve based on credibility and weight.

labor & employmentprocedure