Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Haumschild v. Continental Casualty Co. 7 Wis. 2d 130 (Wis. 1959) - April 10, 1959. Currie, J.

    Uploaded by

    Les Paul
    6 views1 page
    The petitioner, who was married to and domiciled with the respondent in Wisconsin, was injured while riding in a vehicle driven by the respondent in California. The petitioner filed a lawsuit against the respondent and the vehicle's insurer. The respondent argued that under California law, a spouse is immune from tort suits brought by the other spouse, so the case should be dismissed. However, the Wisconsin Supreme Court ruled that Wisconsin law governs issues of interspousal immunity since the spouses were domiciled in Wisconsin, even though the accident occurred in California.

    Original Description:

    Original Title

    67. Haumschild v. Continental Casualty Co. 7 Wis. 2d 130 (Wis. 1959). April 10, 1959. Currie, J.

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The petitioner, who was married to and domiciled with the respondent in Wisconsin, was injured while riding in a vehicle driven by the respondent in California. The petitioner filed a lawsuit against the respondent and the vehicle's insurer. The respondent argued that under California law, a spouse is immune from tort suits brought by the other spouse, so the case should be dismissed. However, the Wisconsin Supreme Court ruled that Wisconsin law governs issues of interspousal immunity since the spouses were domiciled in Wisconsin, even though the accident occurred in California.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    6 views1 page

    Haumschild v. Continental Casualty Co. 7 Wis. 2d 130 (Wis. 1959) - April 10, 1959. Currie, J.

    Uploaded by

    Les Paul
    The petitioner, who was married to and domiciled with the respondent in Wisconsin, was injured while riding in a vehicle driven by the respondent in California. The petitioner filed a lawsuit against the respondent and the vehicle's insurer. The respondent argued that under California law, a spouse is immune from tort suits brought by the other spouse, so the case should be dismissed. However, the Wisconsin Supreme Court ruled that Wisconsin law governs issues of interspousal immunity since the spouses were domiciled in Wisconsin, even though the accident occurred in California.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 1

    Haumschild v. Continental Casualty Co.

    7 Wis. 2d 130 (Wis. 1959). April 10, 1959.


    Currie, J.

    FACTS:
    Petitioner Jacquelyn and respondent Le Roy were married and domiciled in Wisconsin.
    However, they were annulled afterwards. Petitioner was injured when she was riding the
    motor druck driven by the repsondent and thus, a case was filed by the petitioner against
    the respondent and the insurer of the vehicle.

    Respondent wanted the case to be dismissed under the grounds that California law, a
    spouse is immune from suit it tort done by the other spouse.

    ISSUE: Whether or not the California law should apply

    RULING:
    THE COURT RULED IN THE NEGATIVE.

    Initially, The Court stated that law governing the creation and extent of tort liability is that
    of the place where the tort was committed. However, in the decision in Emery vs Emery,
    the court shifted its view that in cases where there is law governing the creation and
    extent of tort liability is that of the place where the tort was committed. In terms of
    interspousal immunity, Wisconsin law governs.

    You might also like