Blixt v. Janowiak
Wisconsin Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtEschweiler, J.
The appellant, defendant Janowiak, challenges the findings of the court below on its determination that fraud was perpetrated by him and defendant Ryb-czinski, and for which fraud the court reinstated plaintiffs Aggie Blixt and Joseph Skinkis in the title to and possession of the farm.
We have not set out the details of the evidence in the record because it presents such a clear and convincing picture of gross fraud talcing advantage of gross credulity that no useful purpose would be served by spreading them upon our record. It is enough to say that the evidence amply supports the conclusions…
2Cases cited29 opinions
- Loos v. . WilkinsonNew York Court of Appeals · 1889
- Barker v. BarkerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1860
- Miles v. Mutual Reserve Fund Life Ass'nWisconsin Supreme Court · 1901
- Elser v. Village of Gross PointIllinois Supreme Court · 1906
- Hamilton National Bank v. HalstedNew York Court of Appeals · 1892
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Sanguinetti v. StreckerNevada Supreme Court · 1978
- Harvey v. HarveyWisconsin Supreme Court · 1930
- Mitchell v. Amerada Hess Corp.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1981
- Ennis v. EnnisCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1979
- Holdsworth v. HealeyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1924
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.