Legal Opinion

Krzysko v. Gaudynski

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided April 5, 1932PublishedCited by 22 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtFowler, J.

The appellants assign error in each of the court’s several-findings of fact and conclusions of law. The contentions as to the facts we will pass by saying that we consider the findings amply supported. The errors of law claimed are (1) that Gaudynski’s agreement with the plaintiffs, if made, was an agreement for an interest in land and void under the statute of frauds because not in writing; and (2) that his agency agreement, if made, was void for the same reason under sec. 240.10, Stats.(1) The fact that Gaudynski was acting as a member of the group seems not, of itself, to- afford ground…

2Cases cited29 opinions

  1. Trice v. ComstockCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1903
  2. Wood v. . RabeNew York Court of Appeals · 1884
  3. Gardner v. . OgdenNew York Court of Appeals · 1860
  4. Brook v. ChappellWisconsin Supreme Court · 1874
  5. Rose v. HaydenSupreme Court of Kansas · 1886

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

3Cited by22 opinions

  1. H-B Ltd. Partnership v. WimmerSupreme Court of Virginia · 1979
  2. Starkweather v. ShafferOregon Supreme Court · 1972
  3. Heims v. HankeWisconsin Supreme Court · 1958
  4. Carkonen v. AlbertsWashington Supreme Court · 1938
  5. Masino v. SechrestWisconsin Supreme Court · 1954

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

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

Powered by the Exa API