with this opinion: By the Court. — The judgment of the Washington County Circuit Court is reversed and cause remanded with directions for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. 1 All further statutory references are to the 1997-98 version of the Wisconsin Statutes unless otherwise noted. 2 Stehlik's blood-alcohol concentration was later determined to be .123 percent. 3 The child was wearing a helmet at the time of the accident. 4 The damages award came to $77 ng that the lack of a statute requiring the plaintiff to wear a helmet meant that there could be no negligence for that failure); Burgstatler v. Fox, 186 N.W.2d 182 (Minn. 1971) (disallowing evidence that the plaintiffs failure to wear a helmet constituted negligence); Mayes v. Paxton, 313 S.C. 109 (S.C. 1993) (<HOLDING>). 9 Our conclusion here pertains to helmet use
holding that the injunction did not constitute a claim holding that there was no evidence in the record to support appellants contention that the doctor committed a separate act of negligence by continuing to prescribe coumadin and that the doctors alleged failure to correct any previous negligence does not constitute additional acts of negligence holding that the plaintiffs failure to wear a helmet did not constitute negligence holding that plaintiffs failure to allege citizenship of first defendant did not constitute good cause for second defendants failure to timely join in removal petition holding that there was no evidence in the record to support appellants contention that the doctor committed a separate act of negligence by continuing to prescribe reglan and that the doctors alleged failure to correct any previous negligence does not constitute additional acts of negligence punctuation omitted