Legal Opinion

Schaefer & Co. v. Kramer

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided January 11, 1938PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMartin, J.

The trial court’s conclusion that the Marshall & Ilsley Bank is, by virtue of its assignment, entitled to the amount due Sophia Kramer as a creditor of her father’s estate; that is, to the proceeds of her claim as filed and allowed against the estate, cannot be sustained. Under its *451assignment, the bank took such interest as Sophia had “either as devisee, legatee or heir at law.” Schaefer &■ Company, by virtue of its assignment, took whatever interest Sophia had as a claimant against the father’s estate and such interest as Sophia might have as a legatee, subject to the bank’s interest in any…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Weber v. NedinWisconsin Supreme Court · 1933
  2. Fries v. KracklauerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1929
  3. Sands v. Kaukauwa Water Power Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1902
  4. Ottoway v. RobertsWisconsin Supreme Court · 1932

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Cortte v. TolzmanWisconsin Supreme Court · 1939
  2. Tullgren v. School District No. 1Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1962

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

Powered by the Exa API