Legal Opinion

Hafemann v. Korinek

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided April 6, 1954PublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtCurrie, J.

The plaintiff lessees contend that the order denying defendants’ motion for summary judgment was proper because the pleadings and affidavits raised material issues of fact. However, it has been repeatedly held that disputed questions of fact, where they are immaterial to the questions of law presented, do not afford a basis for denying an application for summary judgment. Carney-Rutter Agency v. Central Office Buildings (1953), 263 Wis. 244, 248, 57 N. W. (2d) 348; Des Jardin v. Greenfield (1952), 262 Wis. 43, 50, 53 N. W. (2d) 784; State ex rel. Salvesen v. Milwaukee (1946), 249 Wis. 351,…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Asbury v. CochranSupreme Court of Alabama · 1942
  2. Des Jardin v. Town of GreenfieldWisconsin Supreme Court · 1952
  3. Healy v. Metropolitan Utilities DistrictNebraska Supreme Court · 1954
  4. Succession of FilhiolSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1907
  5. Carpenter v. ThornburnSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1905

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

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. Estate of Genrich v. OHIC Ins. Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 2009
  2. Conrad Milwaukee Corp. v. WasilewskiWisconsin Supreme Court · 1966
  3. Whiteco Industries, Inc. v. NickolickIndiana Court of Appeals · 1991
  4. Maroney v. Allstate InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1961
  5. Leuchtenberg v. HoeschlerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1955

10 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