{[ promptMessage ]}

Bookmark it

{[ promptMessage ]}

Breunig v American Family Ins Co

Breunig v American Family Ins Co - (ii b procedural issue...

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
CASE: Breunig v. American Family Ins. Co. Court: SC of Wisc. 173 N.W.2d 619 (Wisc. 1970) P264 Torts Facts a. Plaintiff/Philip Breunig Defendant/American Family Ins. – Insurance Co. for Erma Veith b. Def drove down the wrong side of the highway and believed that her car was going to fly and that God had taken the wheel. c. (1) C/A: Negligence. PL suing Def insurance co. (2) relief requested: (3) defenses raised: insanity. Procedural History: a. Lower court’s ruling(s): verdict for the PL. Def appeals. b. Damages awarded: N/A c. Appellant: Defendant Issues: a. substantive issue (i) Whether the defense of insanity should be an acceptable defense?
Background image of page 1
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: (ii) b. procedural issue: Holding: That while insanity could be a defense in a negligence action, it was for the jury to decide whether the facts underpinning an expert opinion were true. Rule of Law or Legal Principle Applied: “…There must be an absence of notice or forewarning to the person that he may be suddenly subject to such a type of insanity or mental illness.” Reasoning: Evidence of past conduct permitted the jury to conclude that Def could have foreseen the mental Disposition (judgment): Affirmed. Concurring/Dissenting Opinions: Additional Comments/Personal Impressions:...
View Full Document

{[ snackBarMessage ]}

Ask a homework question - tutors are online