Legal Opinion

Crosby v. Keilman

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided December 8, 1931PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtFowler, J.

Waste that lessens the security of the mortgage debt authorizes the appointment of a receiver. But it is to be noted that although the affidavits presented support the findings of the trial judge that waste was committed and that such waste reduced the value of the mortgaged premises, there is no finding that it reduced such value in excess of the amount by which the mortgage debts had been reduced. Unless it did so reduce their value it may well be that the premises are better or more nearly adequate security for the debts than they would be had there been no waste and no reduction of the…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Grether v. NickWisconsin Supreme Court · 1927

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Dick & Reuteman Co. v. Jem Realty Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1937
  2. First Wisconsin Trust Co. v. AdamsWisconsin Supreme Court · 1935
  3. Dick & Reuteman Co. v. HunholzWisconsin Supreme Court · 1934
  4. M&I Marshall & Ilsley Bank v. Urquhart CompaniesCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 2005
  5. Zerfas v. JohnsonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1944

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

Powered by the Exa API