Legal Opinion · Dissent

Voort v. Farmers & Traders Bank

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided October 11, 1927Published

1DissentEschweileR, J.

Because I cannot agree that the facts and circumstances afford proper support for the conclusion reached below and affirmed here whereby the plaintiff’s mortgage is made subordinate to that of the defendant bank, I must dissent.

Tt was admitted on the trial that plaintiff signed the satisfaction of the $11,000 mortgage the same day that the two mortgages were executed, but such satisfaction was not offered in evidence nor does the record disclose when, if ever, it was recorded.

Whether the plaintiff, then seventy-five years of age, having great trust and confidence in Mr. Mueller, who had dealt…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Beilfuss v. DinnauerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1921
  2. Patulski v. Bellmont Realty Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1917

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

Powered by the Exa API