Legal Opinion

Bump v. Dahl

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided March 2, 1965PublishedCited by 30 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHallows, J.

The issue presented on this appeal is whether the possession of Bump was constructive notice to the Dahls of his equitable interest in the triangular piece of land. In the trial court’s view, Bump’s possession was not of such a nature as to require the Dahls to make an inquiry *612because the subdivision was new and consisted of irregular and contoured large lots; the shape of the lots would require a survey or the seller to point out the lot lines, the lot was purchased not from the owner but through a real-estate agency, the plaintiff did not advise the Dahls of his rights, and lastly, the…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Brinkman v. JonesWisconsin Supreme Court · 1878
  2. Fallass v. PierceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1872
  3. Burkhardt v. SmithWisconsin Supreme Court · 1962
  4. Schneck v. Mutual Service Casualty InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1963
  5. Frame v. FrameWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1889

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

3Cited by30 opinions

  1. Kordecki v. RizzoWisconsin Supreme Court · 1982
  2. Donald W. Pelfresne v. Village of Williams BayCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1989
  3. Seraphine v. HardimanWisconsin Supreme Court · 1969
  4. Grosskopf Oil, Inc. v. WinterCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1990
  5. State Ex Rel. Zupancic v. SchimenzWisconsin Supreme Court · 1970

25 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