Lang v. Lions Club of Cudahy Wisconsin, Inc.
Wisconsin Supreme Court
939 N.W.2d 582 (2020)
- Written by Jamie Milne, JD
Facts
The Lions Club of Cudahy Wisconsin, Inc. (Lions) (defendant) hosted an annual music festival at a county park. Lions hired Rhythm Method LLC (Rhythm) (defendant) to provide music for the 2012 festival, as it had done previously. The parties’ contract stated that Rhythm and its members, including Fryed Audio LLC (Fryed) (defendant), were bound by the contract’s terms and conditions. Rhythm was required to provide sound and lights for the music tent. Fryed’s sole member, Steven Fry, laid the necessary cords. He did not receive any specific instructions from Lions. In past years, a Lions official had done a walkthrough and provided mats to cover cords as needed, but it was uncertain whether that occurred in 2012. When festivalgoer Antoinette Lang (plaintiff) tripped on one of Fry’s cords, she sued Lions, Rhythm, and Fryed for negligence. Fryed moved for summary judgment, relying on a Wisconsin statute stating that the statutory owner of land and the owner’s agents did not owe persons entering the land for recreational purposes any duties to keep the property safe for recreational activities, inspect the property, or warn of unsafe conditions. Because Lions was a statutory owner of the park grounds during the festival, Fryed argued that its status as Lions’ agent rendered it immune from liability. Lang argued that Fryed was not Lions’ agent. The trial court granted summary judgment in Fryed’s favor, but the state appeals court reversed. Fryed appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Roggensack, C.J.)
Dissent (Dallet, J.)
Dissent (Hagedorn, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 921,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 47,300 briefs, keyed to 1,000 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.


