Legal Opinion

Banking Commission v. Reinke

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided October 14, 1942Published

1Opinion of the CourtRosenberry, C. J.

The plaintiff seeks to recover of the defendant the amount of the double liability under secs. 313.25 and 287.19, Stats. 1937.

Sec. 313.25, Stats., provides: “When a contingent claim shall have become absolute and been allowed, and the executor or administrator shall not have sufficient assets to pay such claim, the creditor may recover such part of his claim as the executor or administrator has not assets to pay from the heirs, devisees or legatees who have received property from the estate that was liable for the payment of the debts of the decedent.”

Plaintiff contends that this section must…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Estate of George v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1936
  2. Mann v. EvertsWisconsin Supreme Court · 1885
  3. New York Life Insurance v. Estate of LathersWisconsin Supreme Court · 1934
  4. Richardson v. RichardsonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1937
  5. Schafer v. Bellin Memorial Hospital of the Wisconsin Conference of the Methodist Episcopal ChurchWisconsin Supreme Court · 1935

3 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