Ehlinger v. Hauser
Wisconsin Supreme Court
1ConcurrencePatience Drake Roggensack, J.
¶ 122. (concurring). I write in concurrence because I conclude that William Ehlinger (Ehlinger) and Jon Hauser (Hauser) had no binding buy-sell agreement in regard to valuing a shareholder's interest in Evald Moulding, Inc. (Evald). The proposed buy-sell agreement is irretrievably indefinite in that it does not define an essential term of the proposed agreement, i.e., on what basis Evald's assets and liabilities are to be valued in calcu*332lating book value. Accordingly, I conclude that the proposed buy-sell agreement is unenforceable.
¶ 123. I also write in concurrence because I conclude that…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Management Computer Services, Inc. v. Hawkins, Ash, Baptie & Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1996
- Bank of Sun Prairie v. OpsteinWisconsin Supreme Court · 1979
- Phelps v. Physicians InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 2009
- Wisconsin Department of Revenue v. River City Refuse Removal, Inc.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 2007
- Patti v. Western MacHine Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1976
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.