Legal Opinion
Liddicoat v. Kenosha City Board of Education
Wisconsin Supreme Court
Decided October 2, 1962PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtHallows, J.
The plaintiff contends he has tenure because the condition placed upon his leave of absence was void and the breach thereof could not be a valid basis for voiding the subsequent contract for the school year beginning in September, 1959. The plaintiff relies on the class of cases involving covenants not to compete represented by Milwaukee Linen Supply Co. v. Ring (1933), 210 Wis. 467, 246 N. W. 567; Eureka Laundry Co. v. Long (1911), 146 Wis. 205, 131 N. W. 412; Wisconsin Ice & Coal Co. v. Lueth (1933), 213 Wis. 42, 250 N. W. 819; and Fullerton Lumber Co. v. Torborg (1955), 270 Wis. 133, 70 N.…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Fullerton Lumber Co. v. TorborgWisconsin Supreme Court · 1955
- Lakeside Oil Co. v. SlutskyWisconsin Supreme Court · 1959
- Eureka Laundry Co. v. LongWisconsin Supreme Court · 1911
- Wisconsin Ice & Coal Co. v. LuethWisconsin Supreme Court · 1933
- Milwaukee Linen Supply Co. v. RingWisconsin Supreme Court · 1933
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- City of Milwaukee v. Milwaukee CountyWisconsin Supreme Court · 1965
- Schroeder v. Gateway Transportation Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1971
- Iowa Nat. Mut. Ins. Co. v. Liberty Mut. I. Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1969
- Odelberg v. City of KenoshaWisconsin Supreme Court · 1963
- Kidd v. OakesAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1963
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.