Kreutzer v. Westfahl
Wisconsin Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtJones, J.
The first assignment of error is that the complaints state no offense. It is argued that the defendant was not apprised of the charges brought against him and therefore could not know the nature of the offenses attempted to be stated. It is contended that the statute is *476long and prolix, containing many exceptions which are not set forth in the complaints, and that the defendant was compelled to speculate as to what classes of securities he was accused of selling without a permit. Under sec. 183.27 he was charged with having sold securities without a permit. Although this section is broad…
2Cases cited25 opinions
- Hall v. Geiger-Jones Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1917
- Borgnis v. Falk Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1911
- State ex rel. Durner v. HueginWisconsin Supreme Court · 1901
- Merrick Et Al. v. N. W. Halsey & Company Et Al., and the Weis Fibre Container CorporationSupreme Court of the United States · 1916
- Keokee Consolidated Coke Co. v. TaylorSupreme Court of the United States · 1914
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by31 opinions
- Kneeland v. EmertonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1932
- Nelsen v. TilleyNebraska Supreme Court · 1939
- Forest Home Dodge, Inc. v. KarnsWisconsin Supreme Court · 1965
- State Ex Rel. Martin v. City of JuneauWisconsin Supreme Court · 1941
- State v. WilliamsonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1973
26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.