Legal Opinion

Hammond v. Ghent

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided April 2, 1935PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWickhem, J.

The sole question in this case is whether the evidence sustains the finding of the jury that the services, board, and room were furnished deceased under an express contract obligating him to pay their reasonable value. The claimant’s husband is a nephew of the deceased. Claimant and her husband owned their home in the village of Cataract, Wisconsin, and eighty acres of wild land, of which some three acres were cultivated. Deceased first came to claimant’s home in the summer of 1921. Prior to that he had lived upon a farm. He stayed at claimant’s home from time to time each year up to 1932,…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Ellis v. CaryWisconsin Supreme Court · 1889
  2. Estate of KesslerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1894
  3. Tyler v. BurringtonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1876
  4. Pellage v. PellageWisconsin Supreme Court · 1873
  5. Estate of Goltz v. MillerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1931

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. In Matter of Estate of SteffesWisconsin Supreme Court · 1980
  2. Northern Hotel Co. v. Industrial CommissionWisconsin Supreme Court · 1936
  3. Shimek v. Estate of ShimekWisconsin Supreme Court · 1936
  4. Skaugstad v. WinchWisconsin Supreme Court · 1962
  5. Tobler v. GravesWisconsin Supreme Court · 1936

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