Boyle's Wisconsin Safe-Place Law



Chapter Six: Actions
    (d) Evidence
      (7) Not as Safe as Could Be
Evidence as to how a place or thing could reasonably be safer would seem to be admissible inasmuch as the test of liability is "safe as the nature thereof reasonably permits." The court has inferred the propriety of such evidence. [29] It has also said that a jury "could have considered the relatively low cost at which a more efficient and safer" device might have been provided. [30] However, the statement has been made in several cases that the argument that something could be made safer is no argument at all. [31] As heretofore suggested, it is deemed that application of this view beyond the limited circumstances which evoked it cannot be reconciled with the mandatory language of the statute.

Conversion Table Wis. 2d or Wis. to N.W. 2d or N.W.

29. Heckel v. Standard Gateway Theater, 229 Wis. 80, 85 (1938): "... And there is no evidence in the record which indicates that a safer method of fastening the carpet could be employed nor is any suggested which is practical." See also Besnys v. Herman Zohrlaut L. Co., 157 Wis. 203, 209 (1914); Maryland Casualty Co. v. Thomas F. Co., 185 Wis. 98, 105 (1924); Tomlin v. Chicago, M., St. P. & P. R. Co., 220 Wis. 325, 330 (1936); Thoni v. Bancroft Dairy Co., 255 Wis. 577, 582 (1949); Zehren v. F. W. Woolworth Co., 11 Wis. 2d 539, 544 (1960); Paaske v. Perfex Corp., 24 Wis. 2d 485, 489 (1964); Presti v. O'Donohue, 25 Wis. 2d 594, 598 (1964): "The evidence showed that the beveled edge would have avoided the overhang of the steel plate."; Dykstra v. Arthur G. McKee & Co., 92 Wis. 2d 17, 27 (Ct. App. 1979): "In our view, the evidence amply supports the finding that the corridor in which Dykstra was injured could have been rendered safer by the use of reasonable means."

30. Presti v. O'Donahue, 25 Wis. 2d 594, 599 (1964).

31. Hipke v. Ind. Comm., 261 Wis. 226, 233 (1952); Manitowoc Company, Inc. v. Ind. Comm., 273 Wis. 293, 300 (1956); DeMarco v. Braund, 30 Wis. 2d 675, 680 (1966): "The duty set by the statute is not breached merely because the place could be made safer ..." -- but this statement is made in respect to a situation which was as safe as the nature of the place reasonably permitted. Heckendorf v. J. C. Penney Co., 31 Wis. 346, 350 (1966); Skybrock v. Concrete Construction Co., 42 Wis. 2d 480, 488 (1969), quoting DeMarco, supra; Gross v. Denow, 61 Wis. 2d 40, 46 (1973). See Chapter 1, footnote 73.


Revised July 20, 2000

Top