Ryan v. Chicago & Northwestern Railway Co.
Cases that cite this one
5 later published cases cite this decision.
- Department of Revenue v. Dziubek (Wis. 1970)
- City of Tulsa v. McIntosh (Okla. 1930)
- Bunker v. City of Hudson (Wis. 1904)
- O'Connor v. City of Fond du Lac (Wis. 1901)
- Meisenheimer v. Kellogg (Wis. 1900)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
The notice required to be given by ch. 202, Laws of 1893, was a condition precedent to the maintenance of the action. Weed & Gumaer Mfg. Co. v. Whitcomb, ante, p. 226. Such notice must state the “ time and place ” where such damage occurred. Laws of 1893, ch. 202. This means that “ it must point as directly and plainly to the place of the injury as is reasonably practicable, having regard to its character and surroundings.” Weber v. Greenfield, 74 Wis.
The amendment to ch. 202, supra, which was added in the Statutes of 1898, and appears as the last paragraph of sec. 18165 of the Statutes of 1898, does not apply to this case, because it was passed after the rights in this action became fixed, and it is unnecessary to construe it.
By the Court.-— Judgment affirmed.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.