Case Name: Wenninger, Administratrix, Respondent, vs. Witt, Appellant
Court: Wisconsin Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Wisconsin
Decision Date: 1931-05-12
Citations: 205 Wis. 49
Docket Number: 
Parties: Wenninger, Administratrix, Respondent, vs. Witt, Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: Wisconsin Reports
Volume: 205
Pages: 49–51

Head Matter:
Wenninger, Administratrix, Respondent, vs. Witt, Appellant.
April 7
May 12, 1931.
Frank H. Hannaford of Milwaukee, for the appellant.
For the respondent there was a brief by Gold & McCann of Milwaukee, and oral argument by Ray T. McCann.

Opinion:
Rosenberry, C. J.
The defendant seems to be under the impression that the civil court could not properly find the defendant guilty of negligence in driving his tractor upon a public highway late in the afternoon of a wintry day unless it found that by statute the defendant was required to carry a light upon the tractor. That one may be guilty of a want of ordinary care in failing to disclose the presence of an object such as a Fordson tractor under the conditions as they existed at the time and place in question, although the statute does not specifically require a light to be carried, seems to be too plain for argument. It is not necessary for the de fendant to be guilty as a matter of law; it is sufficient if he is guilty as a matter of fact. As the circuit court held, the evidence was ample to sustain the finding of the civil court irrespective of whether or not the statute requires a light upon the tractor. The fact that the statute does not absolutely require a light is no excuse for failure to exercise ordinary care. It simply leaves the question of liability open to be determined upon the facts of each case.
By the Court. — Judgment affirmed.