Legal Opinion

Polley v. Boehck Equipment Co.

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided October 9, 1956PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Broadfoot, J,

The trial court found that the defendant represented to the plaintiff that the engine in question was a new unused engine. The jury determined that such repre*435sentation was false and that the defendant knew that such representation was false.

The defendant first contends that there was insufficient evidence to support those answers. The defendant states that in actions of deceit based on fraud the plaintiff must produce clear, satisfactory, and convincing evidence in support of his allegations. Our attention is directed to cases wherein this court has said that in this type of…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Anderson v. Tri-State Home Improvement Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1955
  2. Estate of Hatten v. MonstedWisconsin Supreme Court · 1939
  3. Larson v. SplettWisconsin Supreme Court · 1954
  4. Benz v. ZobelWisconsin Supreme Court · 1949
  5. Kline v. Washington National InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1935

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Martens Chevrolet, Inc. v. SeneyCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1982
  2. Whipp v. IversonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1969
  3. Beneficial Finance Co. of Charleston v. CollinsWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1966
  4. Degner v. MoncelWisconsin Supreme Court · 1959
  5. Betterman v. Fleming CompaniesCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 2004

2 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