Legal Opinion

Gorski v. City of Milwaukee

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided April 28, 1964PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHallows, J.

The Kline Law under which the real estate was taken, like ch. 32, Stats., did not provide for damages upon a taking in addition to compensation for the fair market value of the real estate. By ch. 486, sec. 18, Laws of 1961, specific items of damage were made compensable in eminent-domain proceedings such as (1) realignment of personal property, (2) removal of personal property to another site, (3) refinancing costs, (4) net rental loss, and (5) expense of plans rendered unusable. Sec. 32.19, Stats. The procedure for the collection of these items of damage is set forth in sec. 32.20. However,…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Thiel v. DamrauWisconsin Supreme Court · 1954
  2. Essock v. MawhinneyWisconsin Supreme Court · 1958
  3. Farley v. Spring Garden Insurance Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1912
  4. State v. Public Service CommissionWisconsin Supreme Court · 1962
  5. Swedowski v. WestgorWisconsin Supreme Court · 1961

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Trible v. Tower InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1969
  2. Lopez v. Prestige Casualty Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1971
  3. Lopez v. Prestige Casualty Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1971

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API