Legal Opinion

Boyce v. Independent Cleaners, Inc.

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided January 12, 1932PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtFairchild, J.

A nonsuit, like many of the law’s instru-mentalities, is especially designed to save the innocent from the annoyance of meeting frivolous or empty charges. The motion for a nonsuit should be granted unless, after giving the testimony the most favorable construction it will bear in plaintiff’s favor, the court finds credible evidence from which a reasonable inference can be drawn in support of the case. Kortendick v. Waterford, 135 Wis. 77, 115 N. W. 331; Mahar v. Montello Granite Co. 146 Wis. 46, 130 N. W. 949; Reiland v. Wis. Valley Elec. Co. 202 Wis. *527499, 233 N. W. 91. Where that…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Gatzow v. BueningWisconsin Supreme Court · 1900
  2. Topolewski v. Plankinton Packing Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1910
  3. Hawarden v. Youghiogheny & Lehigh Coal Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1901
  4. Christensen v. SchwartzWisconsin Supreme Court · 1929
  5. Kortendick v. Town of WaterfordWisconsin Supreme Court · 1908

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

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Augustine v. Anti-Defamation League of B'nai B'rithWisconsin Supreme Court · 1977
  2. Radue v. DillWisconsin Supreme Court · 1976
  3. Judevine v. Benzies-Montanye Fuel & Warehouse Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1936
  4. Maleki v. Fine-Lando Clinic Chartered, S.C.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1991
  5. Scheit v. DuffyWisconsin Supreme Court · 1945

8 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