Legal Opinion
Chmill v. Friendly Ford-Mercury of Janesville, Inc.
Court of Appeals of Wisconsin
Decided January 18, 1990No. 88-1934PublishedCited by 18 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtGartzke, P.J.
This is the second appeal arising out of an action by Leonard and Ruth Chmill against Friendly Ford-Mercury of Janesville and Ford Motor Company under sec. 218.015, Stats., Wisconsin's "lemon law." Defendants brought the first and lost. Chmills bring the second.
In the original judgment, the trial court ordered defendants to replace Chmills' Ford Tempo automobile with a new vehicle and pay Chmills $8,646 for attorney fees, costs, and disbursements. We affirmed and directed that "[o]n remand the trial court shall determine a reasonable attorney fee award to the Chmills for the appeal to this…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Loy v. BundersonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1982
- Prandini v. National Tea Co.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1978
- Standard Theatres, Inc. v. State, Department of TransportationWisconsin Supreme Court · 1984
- Shands v. CastrovinciWisconsin Supreme Court · 1983
- Dairyland Equipment Leasing, Inc. v. BohenWisconsin Supreme Court · 1980
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by18 opinions
- Hughes v. Chrysler Motors Corp.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1996
- Town Bank v. City Real Estate Development, LLCWisconsin Supreme Court · 2010
- Kolupar v. Wilde Pontiac Cadillac, Inc.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 2007
- Radford v. J.J.B. Enterprises, Ltd.Court of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1991
- Lynch v. Crossroads Counseling Center, Inc.Court of Appeals of Wisconsin · 2004
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.