Groshek v. TREWIN
Wisconsin Supreme Court
1Concurring in part, dissenting in partShirley S. Abrahamson, C.J.
¶ 34. {concurring in part and dissenting in part). I agree with those parts of the majority opinion that conclude that the attorney breached his fiduciary duty and that rescission is therefore warranted.
¶ 35. I dissent from those parts of the majority opinion (including Part III) that conclude that punitive damages are not available in the instant case. I conclude, as did the circuit court, that punitive damages are available in the instant case. I would therefore remand this case to the circuit court to restore the judgment originally entered for punitive damages in the amount of $38,200.
¶…
2Cases cited29 opinions
- In RE MARRIAGE OF COOK v. CookWisconsin Supreme Court · 1997
- Barry v. EdmundsSupreme Court of the United States · 1886
- Management Computer Services, Inc. v. Hawkins, Ash, Baptie & Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1996
- Tideway Oil Programs, Inc. v. SerioMississippi Supreme Court · 1983
- Deanna L. Beard, Appellee/cross-Appellant v. Flying J, Inc., Appellant/cross-Appellee, and Richard KroutCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2001
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.