Legal Opinion

Hennen v. Hennen

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided February 1, 1972No. 189PublishedCited by 17 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtConnor T. Hansen, J.

We would first observe that neither in his brief, nor oral argument, has counsel for the plaintiff submitted any authority in support of his position.

The conclusion in plaintiff’s brief contains the following statements:

“There were two alternative approaches considered in the writing of this brief: to prostrate myself and with Buddhistic humility pray the court to recognize my merit and my cause or, by summoning up a measure of arrogance and pomposity, to fully advocate my own worth.
“The latter cause leaves me open to this Court’s retort ‘Ad populum phaleras ego te intus et in cute novi.’…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Dees v. DeesWisconsin Supreme Court · 1969
  2. Balaam v. BalaamWisconsin Supreme Court · 1971
  3. Spheeris v. SpheerisWisconsin Supreme Court · 1967
  4. Touchett v. E Z Paintr Corp.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1961
  5. O'Connor v. O'ConnorWisconsin Supreme Court · 1970

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

3Cited by17 opinions

  1. Lien v. LienSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1979
  2. Krage v. KrageSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1983
  3. Bloomer v. BloomerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1978
  4. Herro, McAndrews & Porter, S. C. v. GerhardtWisconsin Supreme Court · 1974
  5. Tesch v. TeschWisconsin Supreme Court · 1974

12 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