Legal Opinion

Caskey v. Peterson

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided January 7, 1936PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

The following opinion was filed December 3, 1935 :

Martin, J.

Appellants’ counsel contends that the substituted service made on Harold Peterson’s father on February 23, 1934, constituted a valid service, and, further, that the notice of appearance served by Attorney Wendt on the plaintiffs’ attorneys on March 7, 1934, constituted a general appearance in the three actions on behalf of said defendant. Counsel for the respondent, Harold Peterson, takes issue with this contention.

It appears that, for a period of approximately two years immediately prior to February 23, 1934, the respondent, Harold…

2Cases cited21 opinions

  1. Earle v. McVeighSupreme Court of the United States · 1876
  2. Frame v. PlumbWisconsin Supreme Court · 1909
  3. O'Dell v. RogersWisconsin Supreme Court · 1878
  4. Good v. NorleySupreme Court of Iowa · 1869
  5. Klingbeil v. SaucermanWisconsin Supreme Court · 1917

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

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Groh v. W. O. Krahn, Inc.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1937
  2. Ausen v. MoriartyWisconsin Supreme Court · 1954
  3. Herr v. Humphrey, JudgeCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1939
  4. Tande v. Vernon CountyWisconsin Supreme Court · 1938
  5. Gray v. DrozeDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1947

3 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