Zimmerman v. Zeimet
Wisconsin Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtBrown, J.
The administrator’s first contention is that because of the near relationship and the common home of Anna and Lucy, Lucy is presumed to have acted gratuitously. There is such a presumption, a rebuttable one, between near relatives. We need not decide whether it extends to persons with the relationship and association of these two women for, if the presumption exists, it was rebutted by three competent witnesses who testified that Anna Zeimet told them at separate times that she and Lucy had an agreement for Lucy to make her home with Anna and she would get whatever was left when Anna was…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Frost v. Corporation Comm'n of Okla.Supreme Court of the United States · 1929
- State ex rel. Wisconsin Telephone Co. v. HenryWisconsin Supreme Court · 1935
- State ex rel. Reynolds v. SandeWisconsin Supreme Court · 1931
- Braasch v. BondeWisconsin Supreme Court · 1926
- State ex rel. Rosenhein v. FrearWisconsin Supreme Court · 1909
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- City of Madison v. NickelWisconsin Supreme Court · 1974
- State Ex Rel. State Bar of Wisconsin v. KellerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1962
- Ennis v. EnnisCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1979
- Smith v. Journal Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1955
- Anderson v. NelsonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1968
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.