Legal Opinion

Ratcliff v. Aspros

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided November 18, 1948PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBroadfoot, J.

Appellant seeks a reversal of the judgment of the circuit court for the following reasons: (1) The option provision in the lease is too indefinite and uncertain to be enforced and is void; (2) respondents are not the partners to which any option was given; and (3) the court erred in refusing to submit a special verdict to the jury as requested by the plaintiff.

The law in Wisconsin as to the construction of a covenant to renew a lease is well settled. In the case of Kollock v. Scribner (1897), 98 Wis. 104, 109, 73 N. W. 776, the lease was for a term of years “with the privilege of a renewal.”…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Kollock v. ScribnerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1897
  2. Fergen v. LyonsWisconsin Supreme Court · 1916
  3. Pelikan v. SpheerisWisconsin Supreme Court · 1948

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Witt v. Realist, Inc.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1962
  2. Petersen v. Pilgrim VillageWisconsin Supreme Court · 1950
  3. Huntoon v. CapozzaWisconsin Supreme Court · 1973
  4. Krukowski v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 2000
  5. William B. Tanner Co., Inc. v. Sparta-Tomah Broadcasting Company, Inc., D/B/A Radio WcowCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1983

8 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