RISDON, INC. v. Miller Distributing Co.
Wisconsin Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtBeilfuss, J.
The principal issue is, Did Vanderberg have apparent authority to bind Miller for the purchase price of the fourth order?
The trial court found that Vanderberg had express authority to make the first three purchases from Risdon. Miller does not contest this finding, in fact prior to litigation he readily acknowledged liability for these purchases and paid for them in the regular course of business.
The fourth order is in dispute. Risdon claims Vander-berg had apparent authority to act for Miller and that Miller is liable for the entire disputed order. Miller claims that Vanderberg was not an…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- McDermott v. JacksonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1897
- Voell v. KleinWisconsin Supreme Court · 1924
- Hansche v. A. J. Conroy, Inc.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1936
- Domasek v. KluckWisconsin Supreme Court · 1902
- Pluto Powder Co. v. Cuba City State BankWisconsin Supreme Court · 1913
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Chicago & North Western Transportation Co. v. Thoreson Food Products, Inc.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1976
- Hollingsworth v. American Finance Corp.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1978
- Scheuer v. Central States Pension FundDistrict Court, E.D. Wisconsin · 1973
- Janke Construction Co., Inc. v. Vulcan Materials Co.District Court, W.D. Wisconsin · 1974
- Martinson v. American Family Mutual InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1974
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.