Legal Opinion

Hoffman v. Maffioli

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided November 24, 1899PublishedCited by 35 opinions

Appeal from a judgment of the county court of Wauke-sha county: M. S, G-eiswold, Judge.

1Opinion of the Court

Oassoday, O. J.

This action was commenced June 28, 1898, to recover $2,888, with interest from June 16,1898, on *631account for goods, wares, and merchandise sold and delivered by the plaintiff, doing business under the name of “ The Waukesha Stone & Quarry Company,” to the defendant, between April 23, 1898, and June 16, 1898, at the agreed 'price, and which was reasonably worth the sum stated, all of which became due and payable June 16, 1898.

The defendant answered by way of admissions and denials, and also alleged by way of counterclaim, in effect, that the defendant was a principal contractor…

2Cases cited24 opinions

  1. Nash v. TowneSupreme Court of the United States · 1867
  2. United States v. PeckSupreme Court of the United States · 1880
  3. Merriam v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1883
  4. Minnesota Lumber Co. v. Whitebreast Coal Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 1895
  5. Chicago & Great Eastern Railway Co. v. DaneNew York Court of Appeals · 1870

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

3Cited by35 opinions

  1. Cold Blast Transp. Co. v. Kansas City Bolt & Nut Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1902
  2. Chicago & Northwestern Railway Co. v. StateWisconsin Supreme Court · 1906
  3. Higbie v. RustIllinois Supreme Court · 1904
  4. A. Santaella & Co. v. Otto F. Lange Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1907
  5. Grand Prairie Gravel Co. v. Joe B. Wills Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1916

30 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