S & M Rotogravure Service, Inc. v. Baer
Wisconsin Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtHanley, J.
Two issues are presented on appeal:
1. Does the second amended third-party complaint state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action for a money judgment based upon unjust enrichment against D&E?
2. Did the trial court abuse its discretion in denying S & M’s motion for summary judgment upon Baer’s counterclaim?
Third-Party Complaint
The trial court concluded that the second amended third-party complaint sufficiently states a cause of action in equity for unjust enrichment. The elements of such an action are:
“(1) a benefit conferred upon the defendant by the plaintiff; (2) an appreciation…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Seegers v. SpragueWisconsin Supreme Court · 1975
- Martinson v. Brooks Equipment Leasing, Inc.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1967
- Utschig v. McCloneWisconsin Supreme Court · 1962
- GEBHARDT BROS., INC. v. BrimmelWisconsin Supreme Court · 1966
- Nelson v. PrestonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1952
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by41 opinions
- Wisconsin Knife Works v. National Metal CraftersCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1986
- DCB Construction Co. v. Central City Development Co.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1998
- Axenics, Inc. v. Turner Construction Co.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 2013
- Gee v. EberleSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1980
- Puttkammer v. MinthWisconsin Supreme Court · 1978
36 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.