![Pargeter v. Chicago & N. W. R. Co.](/assets/artwork/1x1-42817eea7ade52607a760cbee00d1495.gif)
![Pargeter v. Chicago & N. W. R. Co.](/assets/artwork/1x1-42817eea7ade52607a760cbee00d1495.gif)
![](/assets/artwork/1x1-42817eea7ade52607a760cbee00d1495.gif)
![](/assets/artwork/1x1-42817eea7ade52607a760cbee00d1495.gif)
Pargeter v. Chicago & N. W. R. Co.
WI.189 , 60 N.W.2d 81, 250 (1953)(264 Wis)
-
- € 0,99
-
- € 0,99
Publisher Description
GEHL, Justice. Defendant has moved for a re-hearing. It asserts correctly that we overlooked the provisions of sec. 274.12(2) Stats. in
refusing to review its contention that there is no evidence to support the jury's finding that the lantern signal given by
the railway flagman constituted an invitation to the plaintiff to enter the crossing.