Derbeck v. Albright
Wisconsin Supreme Court
1DissentCrownhart, J.
{dissenting). The statement of facts in the main opinion is quite complete and I will hot repeat. It is said in the opinion: “We are satisfied that Sharon, the agent of the defendant, perpetrated a moral fraud upon the plaintiff.” I think it was that, and more. It was a criminal fraud. Palotta v. State, 184 Wis. 290, 199 N. W. 72; Corscot v. State, 178 Wis. 661, 190 N. W. 465; Stecher v. State, 168 Wis. 183, 169 N. W. 287.
*521Fraud has been aptly defined as—
“. . . a generic term, and embraces all the multifarious means which human ingenuity can devise, and are resorted to by one individual to get…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Palotta v. StateWisconsin Supreme Court · 1924
- Kuelkamp v. HiddingWisconsin Supreme Court · 1872
- Barr v. BakerSupreme Court of Missouri · 1846
- Corscot v. StateWisconsin Supreme Court · 1922
- Stecher v. StateWisconsin Supreme Court · 1918
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.