Legal Opinion

Ernest v. Schmidt

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided October 8, 1929PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

The following opinion was filed February 5, 1929:

Doerfler, J.

Plaintiff’s complaint can hardly be commended as a model of pleading. In many respects it is vague and indefinite, and it is only by careful study of the various parts and of the pleading as a whole that the intentions of the pleader become reasonably apparent. Such pleadings are not conducive to a speedy administration of justicé, and have a tendency rather to impede the course of justice than to promote it. The brief states that the agreement set forth in the complaint in verbatim was drafted by a lawyer. This is hardly credible,…

2Cases cited20 opinions

  1. Brandeis v. NeustadtlWisconsin Supreme Court · 1860
  2. Barnes v. City of BeloitWisconsin Supreme Court · 1865
  3. Goldberg v. . UtleyNew York Court of Appeals · 1875
  4. Rowell v. BarberWisconsin Supreme Court · 1910
  5. Steuerwald v. RichterWisconsin Supreme Court · 1914

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. McGovern v. EckhartWisconsin Supreme Court · 1929
  2. Jordan v. Buick Motor Co.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1935
  3. William B. Tanner Co., Inc. v. Sparta-Tomah Broadcasting Company, Inc., D/B/A Radio WcowCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1983
  4. Karass v. MarquardtWisconsin Supreme Court · 1939
  5. Isaacs v. Milwaukee Chair Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1938

2 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