Netherton v. Frank Holton & Co.
Wisconsin Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
. The following opinion was filed October 12, 1926:
Eschweiler, J.
In the trial below it was frankly conceded in open court by counsel for both parties, appellant *488being then represented by other counsel than those on this appeal, that the contract of March 1, 1921, set forth above, was void as against public policy. Such concession was advisedly made under repeated decisions of our own court, to say nothing of authorities elsewhere. Sauerhering v. Rueping, 137 Wis. 407, 413, 119 N. W. 184; Timme v. Kopmeier, 162 Wis. 571, 576, 156 N. W. 961; W. C. Zachow Co. v. Grignon, 172 Wis. 449, 455, 179…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Continental Wall Paper Co. v. Louis Voight & Sons Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1909
- Timme v. KopmeierWisconsin Supreme Court · 1916
- Howe v. ChmielinskiMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1921
- Twentieth Century Co. v. QuillingWisconsin Supreme Court · 1907
- Sauerhering v. RuepingWisconsin Supreme Court · 1909
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Abramson v. AbramsonNebraska Supreme Court · 1956
- Brill v. SalzwedelWisconsin Supreme Court · 1940
- Meske v. WenzelWisconsin Supreme Court · 1945
- Smith v. SmithWisconsin Supreme Court · 1949