Meadowlark Farms, Inc. v. Warken

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that whether sharecropper who had been directed to deliver corn to a particular facility had voluntarily incurred the risk posed by an unreasonably dangerous grain auger used at that facility was an issue of fact for resolution by the jury
• holding that whether sharecropper who had been directed to deliver corn to a particular facility had voluntarily incurred the risk posed by an unreasonably dangerous grain auger used at that facility was an issue of fact for resolution by the jury
• “[A] plaintiff is contributorily negligent as a matter of law if his knowledge and appreciation of the dangers ... surpassed or equaled that of the defendant.”
• \[A] plaintiff is contributorily negligent as a matter of law if his knowledge and appreciation of the dangers ... surpassed or equaled that of the defendant.\
• whether sharecropper who had been directed to deliver corn to a particular facility had voluntarily incurred the risk posed by an unreasonably dangerous grain auger used at that facility was an issue of fact for resolution by the jury
• whether sharecropper who had been directed to deliver corn to a particular facility had voluntarily incurred the risk posed by an unreasonably dangerous grain auger used at that facility was an issue of fact for resolution by the jury

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).