Legal Opinion
Graef v. Kanouse
Wisconsin Supreme Court
Decided October 13, 1931PublishedCited by 23 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtRosenberry, C. J.
The principal contention of the defendant is that the contract made by the heirs and set out in the plaintiff’s complaint is void as against public policy within the rule laid down in the following cases: Will of Dardis, 135 Wis. 457, 115 N. W. 332; Will of Rice, 150 Wis. 401, 136 N. W. 956, 137 N. W. 778; Will of Reynolds, 151 Wis. 375, 138 N. W. 1019; Schoenwetter v. Schoenwetter, 164 Wis. 131, 159 N. W. 737; Estate of Staab, 166 Wis. 587, 166 N. W. 326.
Before entering upon a consideration of the doctrine of those cases as applied to the facts in this case, we shall call attention to some…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Cowie v. StrohmeyerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1912
- Will on DardisWisconsin Supreme Court · 1908
- Boynton v. HubbardMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1810
- Stringfellow v. EarlyCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1897
- Estate of StaabWisconsin Supreme Court · 1918
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by23 opinions
- In Re Estate of MeredithMichigan Supreme Court · 1936
- Newcomb v. IngramWisconsin Supreme Court · 1932
- In Re Will of PendergrassSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1960
- In Re Vasgaard's EstateSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1934
- Risher v. American Surety Co. of New YorkWisconsin Supreme Court · 1938
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.