Legal Opinion

Bornemann v. City of New Berlin

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided March 2, 1965PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHeffernan, J.

This appeal presents these issues:(1) Did the trial court abuse its discretion in granting an extension of time to the city in which to answer the complaint ?(2) Did the city’s answer meet the requirements of sec. 263.13, Stats. ?(3) Was it prejudicial error for the trial court to grant the city’s motion for summary judgment when such notice of motion was given more than forty days after the joinder of issue and no extension of time had been granted within which to make this motion ?(4) Which of the two statutes of limitations, sec. 66.60 (12) (a) and (e) or sec. 330.24, Stats., is applicable…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Valentine v. Patrick Warren Construction Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1953
  2. Estate of MillerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1952
  3. Cruis Along Boats, Inc. v. Standard Steel Products Manufacturing Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1964
  4. Costello v. PolenskaWisconsin Supreme Court · 1942
  5. Daugherty v. HerteWisconsin Supreme Court · 1946

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Hedtcke v. Sentry InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1982
  2. Savina v. Wisconsin Gas Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1967
  3. Schlosser v. Allis-Chalmers Corp.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1974
  4. Aiello v. Village of Pleasant PrairieWisconsin Supreme Court · 1996
  5. Ronald E. Belding, Jr. v. Deeanna L. DemoulinWisconsin Supreme Court · 2014

9 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