Legal Opinion

Confidential Loan & Mortgage Co. v. Hardgrove

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided June 15, 1951PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtFairchild, J.

The first question presented on this appeal, to wit, the right to immediate possession of the articles covered by the conditional sales contract, must be resolved in favor of the respondent, because of the doctrine laid down in our cases and fully recognized in Forgan v. Smedal (1931), 203 Wis. 564, 234 N. W. 896. See also Universal Credit Co. v. Finn (1933), 212 Wis. 601, 250 N. W. 391. As contended by the respondent and decided by the trial court, the bringing of the tractor and trailer into the state of Wisconsin from the state of Florida for the purpose of delivering merchandise and the…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Winslow v. UrquhartWisconsin Supreme Court · 1875
  2. Commercial Investment Trust, Inc. v. William Frankfurth Hardware Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1922
  3. Griffith v. SmithWisconsin Supreme Court · 1868
  4. Forgan v. SmedalWisconsin Supreme Court · 1931
  5. Atwater v. SpaldingSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1902

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Ford Motor Co. v. LyonsCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1987
  2. First National Bank of Glendale v. Sheriff of Milwaukee CountyWisconsin Supreme Court · 1967
  3. JORDAN-JEFFERSON, INC. v. ScheerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1962
  4. In Re KarisUnited States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Wisconsin · 1997
  5. Associates Discount Corp. v. Mohs Realty, Inc.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1966

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API