Legal Opinion

Kuenzi v. Leisten

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided January 12, 1937PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the CourtMartin, J.

The only question on this appeal is whether respondents, being co-owners of the silo filler with defendants and others, have stated a cause of action in their complaint. Appellants rely principally on the decisions of.this court in Tallman v. Barnes, 54 Wis. 181, 11 N. W. 478, and Trustees of Ashland Lodge I. O. O. F. v. Williams, 100 Wis. 223, 75 N. W. 954. In Tallman v. Barnes, supra, it is said, at p. 185:

“It is well settled in law that one tenant in common has no right to take personal property from his cotenant by force; but if he can get possession without resort to force, then he can…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Tallman v. BarnesWisconsin Supreme Court · 1882
  2. Trustees of Ashland Lodge No. 63 v. WilliamsWisconsin Supreme Court · 1898
  3. Newton v. GardnerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1869

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. In re FlournoyUnited States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Wisconsin · 2017

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

Powered by the Exa API