Legal Opinion

Borg v. Downing

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided June 2, 1936PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

The following opinion was filed March 31, 1936:

Fritz, J.

In commencing this action, plaintiff, in his complaint, alleged a cause of action to recover damages from the defendant for his breach of contract to drill a well for plaintiff, by defendant’s failure to use usual and ordinary principles of engineering, and to perform his work and complete the well in a workmanlike manner. Defendant admitted constructing the well pursuant to a written contract, but denied that he had failed to properly perform the contract; and he counterclaimed to recover, on quantum meruit, for special services and…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Hoffman v. DixonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1900
  2. Butler v. DavisWisconsin Supreme Court · 1903
  3. Rupert v. Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul & Pacific RailroadWisconsin Supreme Court · 1930
  4. Smith v. ReedWisconsin Supreme Court · 1910
  5. Steubing v. ArnoldWisconsin Supreme Court · 1933

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

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Roscoe Moss Co. v. JenkinsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1942
  2. Groh v. W. O. Krahn, Inc.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1937
  3. McCaffrey v. Minneapolis, St. Paul & Sault Ste. Marie Railway Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1936
  4. Atlas Const. Co., Inc. v. Aqua Drilling Co.Wyoming Supreme Court · 1977
  5. Charles v. UmentumWisconsin Supreme Court · 1952

6 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