Legal Opinion

Lorscheter v. Lorscheter

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided November 5, 1971No. 137PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWilkie, J.

Although a number of issues are raised in the briefs, they may be considered in three questions:

1. Did the trial court err in failing to allow a substitution of attorneys on the day of the trial?

2. Did the court abuse its discretion in failing to grant appellant’s motion to vacate the divorce judgment?

3. Did the court abuse its discretion in ordering that the property settlement tendered appellant be made payable both to appellant and her first attorney?

Substitution of attorney on the day of trial.

Art. VII, sec. 20, of the Wisconsin constitution 1 guarantees any suitor the right to be…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Gray v. GrayWisconsin Supreme Court · 1939
  2. Kilmer v. KilmerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1946
  3. McMahon v. SnyderWisconsin Supreme Court · 1903
  4. Subacz v. SubaczWisconsin Supreme Court · 1924
  5. Jermain v. JermainWisconsin Supreme Court · 1943

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Dugenske v. DugenskeWisconsin Supreme Court · 1977
  2. Foley-Ciccantelli v. Bishop's Grove Condominium Ass'nWisconsin Supreme Court · 2011
  3. Powerlock Systems, Inc. v. Duo-Lok, Inc.District Court, E.D. Wisconsin · 1972

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API