Legal Opinion

Bohnert v. Radke

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided February 9, 1926PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtCrownhart, J.

It is earnestly contended by the defendant that there is no sufficient evidence to justify the verdict of the jury. The land contract, in which the agreement to assume the mortgage is claimed to exist, was lost and could not be produced at the trial. The finding of the jury, therefore, depends upon the oral testimony of the witnesses. There is no dispute as to the contents of the contract except upon the one point, and that is as to whether it contained a provision on the part of the appellant in which he assumed and agreed to pay the chattel mortgage in question. One witness, Attorney August…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. First Wisconsin National Bank v. Forsyth Leather Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1926

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Pederson v. First National Bank of SuperiorWisconsin Supreme Court · 1966
  2. Certified Industries Inc. v. Royal Indemnity Co.New York Supreme Court · 1964
  3. O'Dell v. O'DellSupreme Court of Iowa · 1947

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

Powered by the Exa API