Biller v. Meyer
| Decision Date | 20 May 1929 |
| Docket Number | No. 4138.,4138. |
| Citation | 66 ALR 436,33 F.2d 440 |
| Parties | BILLER et al. v. MEYER. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Seventh Circuit |
Eugene L. McIntyre, of Milwaukee, Wis., for appellant.
William J. Morgan, of Milwaukee, Wis., and Paul MacGuffin, of Waukegan, Ill., for appellee.
Before EVANS and PAGE, Circuit Judges, and WHAM, District Judge.
Appellee brought this action to recover damages for injuries by him received through the alleged negligence of the defendant Biller. The verdict and judgment went to appellee, and this appeal followed.
The errors assigned relate to rulings on evidence and instructions to the jury. It is also argued that appellant, Inter-State Exchange, was not a proper party defendant, nor should judgment have been rendered against it.
Motion to Direct a Verdict. An examination of the evidence convinces us that the motion to direct a verdict was properly denied. Only a brief statement of the facts will be attempted. Defendant Biller parked his car one morning in front of a restaurant on the south side of Wisconsin avenue, Milwaukee, Wis., a short distance from Seventh street. Between Seventh and Eighth streets there was a considerable grade. Shortly after Biller entered the restaurant the car started down the street and struck and injured the plaintiff. Biller testified to precautions by him taken when he left the car which, if true, would have absolved him from all charge of negligence. On the other hand, it appears that very shortly after he left the car it started down the street, gaining momentum as it traveled, which fact contradicted Biller's testimony respecting the setting of brakes and "putting the gear in reverse." Had the brakes been set the car would have remained where it was stopped. The action of the car leaves little room for doubt as to the facts. The case called for the application of the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur. Hughes v. Rentschler Floral Co., 193 Wis. 49, 213 N. W. 625.
Damages. The court charged the jury:
Appellants could not, and do not, complain of this charge as such. Their criticism is directed to the lack of evidence to support any allowance for permanent injury. Our study of the evidence bearing on this issue leads us to a contrary view. We therefore reject this assignment of error.
Joinder of Insurance Company as Party. Section 85.25, Wisconsin Statutes, reads:
"Any bond or policy of...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Lieberthal v. Glens Falls Indem. Co. of Glens Falls, N. Y.
...ritht transitory in its nature, and that it did not violate public policy to bring the suit in Minnesota. Also see Biller v. Meyer, 7 Cir., 33 F.2d 440, 66 A.L.R. 436. To like effect see > tna Casualty & Surety Co. of Hartford, Conn., v. Gentry, 191 Okl. 659, 132 P.2d 326, 145 A.L. R. 623;S......
-
Zieman v. United States Fidelity & Guar. Co. of Baltimore, Maryland
... ... Smart, 267 U.S. 126, 69 L.Ed. 538, 45 S.Ct. 320; ... Railway Express Agency v. Virginia, 75 L.Ed. 450, ... 282 U.S. 440, 51 S.Ct. 201; Biller v. Meyer, 33 F.2d ... The ... statute in the interest of the public should be reasonably ... and liberally construed. Stone v ... ...
-
James v. Young
...the owner of the automobile is properly joined as defendant in an action against the owner.' 5 Am.Jur. 332. See also Biller v. Meyer, 7 Cir., 33 F.2d 440, 66 A.L.R. 436. Some cases have been cited by the appellees where joinder of insurer and insured have not been permitted. An examination ......
-
Colla v. Mandella
...1927, 193 Wis. 49, 213 N.W. 625, where the court treated the case as one calling for application of the doctrine, Biller v. Meyer, 7 Cir., 33 F.2d 440, 441, 66 A.L.R. 436. For reference to a host of cases involving similar facts and where the rule was applied see 16 A.L.R.2d at page Defenda......