Legal Opinion

Buerger v. Buerger

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided October 10, 1922PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJones, J.

The statute provides, among other things, that the complaint shall contain “a plain and concise statement of the facts constituting each cause of action, without unnecessary repetition.” Sub. (2), sec. 2646, Stats. In drafting this complaint plaintiff’s counsel evidently attempted to make a concise statement of the necessary facts, *355but in so doing omitted many facts that would have thrown needed light upon the controversy.

It is clear that an order, was made by the county court appointing trustees in the estate, but it does not appear what was the authority upon which the order was based. It…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. White v. WhiteWisconsin Supreme Court · 1907
  2. Wisdom v. WisdomWisconsin Supreme Court · 1914
  3. Nichol v. AlexanderWisconsin Supreme Court · 1871
  4. Pietraszwicz v. PietraszwiczWisconsin Supreme Court · 1921
  5. Buth v. DavisWisconsin Supreme Court · 1921

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. McIntyre v. CarrollWisconsin Supreme Court · 1927
  2. Ernest v. SchmidtWisconsin Supreme Court · 1929
  3. Karass v. MarquardtWisconsin Supreme Court · 1939

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

Powered by the Exa API