Cutler v. Babcock
Wisconsin Supreme Court
APPEAL from the Superior Court of Milwaukee County. This action, was brought for the recovery of three lots in the village of Waukesha, and upon a trial by the court the plaintiff had judgment against the defendants for the recovery of two of them only, namely, lots 17 and 18, in block E, and the defendants had judgment for the other.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from the Superior Court of Milwaukee County. This action, was brought for the recovery of three lots in the village of Waukesha, and upon a trial by the court the plaintiff had judgment against the defendants for the recovery of two of them only, namely, lots 17 and 18, in block E, and the defendants had judgment for the other. The defendants appeal from that portion of the judgment relating to lots 17 and 18, and insist that upon the pleadings and facts found by the trial court that jddgment ought to have been rendered in their favor as to these two lots, and not against them. There…
1Opinion of the CourtPiNNet, J.
The court below decided that the defendant Babcock, by consenting to the foreclosure of the mortgage and to the plaintiff bidding, in the premises on the sale under the foreclosure judgment and the taking of the title to the lots in himself, as set forth in the findings of fact, attempted to create a trust in the two lots in question resting' in parol, which was void under the statute of frauds, and that the plaintiff’s legal title thus acquired must prevail, and therefore allowed him to recover against the defendants the lots in question. Whether this is the correct legal conclusion from the…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Ryan v. . DoxNew York Court of Appeals · 1866
- Brook v. ChappellWisconsin Supreme Court · 1874
- Rose v. BatesSupreme Court of Missouri · 1848
- Fairchild v. RasdallWisconsin Supreme Court · 1859
- Laing v. McKeeMichigan Supreme Court · 1865
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Ransdel v. MooreIndiana Supreme Court · 1899
- Wall v. Minneapolis, St. Paul & Sault Ste. Marie Railway Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1893
- Henrikson v. HenriksonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1910
- Moore v. De BernardiNevada Supreme Court · 1923
- Peterson v. HicksWashington Supreme Court · 1906
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.