Ernest v. Schmidt
Wisconsin Supreme Court
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
- Brandeis v. NeustadtlWisconsin Supreme Court · 1860
- Barnes v. City of BeloitWisconsin Supreme Court · 1865
- Goldberg v. . UtleyNew York Court of Appeals · 1875
- Rowell v. BarberWisconsin Supreme Court · 1910
- Steuerwald v. RichterWisconsin Supreme Court · 1914
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- McGovern v. EckhartWisconsin Supreme Court · 1929
- Jordan v. Buick Motor Co.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1935
- William B. Tanner Co., Inc. v. Sparta-Tomah Broadcasting Company, Inc., D/B/A Radio WcowCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1983
- Karass v. MarquardtWisconsin Supreme Court · 1939
- Isaacs v. Milwaukee Chair Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1938
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.