Peterson v. Feyereisen
Wisconsin Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtFritz, J.
If the facts alleged in the answer of the defendant ever entitled him to affirmative relief on the ground of fraud, his right to such relief had become barred in June, 1925, by secs. 330.15, 330.19 (7), Stats., by reason of his failure to commence an action therefor within six years.
The only question on this appeal is whether, although sec. 330.27, Stats., provides that “A cause of action upon which an action cannot be maintained, as prescribed in this chapter, cannot be effectually interposed as a defense, counterclaim or setoff,” the facts constituting such cause of action may nevertheless…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Williams v. NeelyCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1904
- Conner & Wife v. SmithSupreme Court of Alabama · 1889
- Beecher v. BaldwinSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1887
- C. Aultman & Co. v. TorreySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1893
- Kelly Asphalt Block Co. v. Brooklyn Alcatraz Asphalt Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1920
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Zweck v. D P Way Corp.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1975
- American Motors Corp. v. Department of RevenueWisconsin Supreme Court · 1974
- Dixie Margarine Co. v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1940
- Webb v. American Surety Co. of New YorkCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1937
- Shriner v. Price, Exr.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1944
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.