Legal Opinion

Hoeft v. Kuhnz

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided February 6, 1934PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWickhem, J.

The defendants J. E. Kennedy and Mary C. Kennedy are the grantees of the original mortgagors, Arthur H. Kuhnz and Bessie Kuhnz. The warranty deed to the Kennedys contains an express assumption of the mortgage under foreclosure. Two questions are raised by defendants Kennedy. It is first contended that they are entitled to reformation of the deed upon the ground of mutual mistake. It is claimed that the deed in question was delivered in execution of a contract of sale, by the terms of which it was agreed that the property in question would be conveyed to the Kennedys “subject to mortgage of…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Suring State Bank v. GieseWisconsin Supreme Court · 1933
  2. McClellan v. SanfordWisconsin Supreme Court · 1870
  3. Harter v. ChristophWisconsin Supreme Court · 1873
  4. Sable v. MaloheyWisconsin Supreme Court · 1880
  5. Meiswinkel v. St. Paul Fire & Marine InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1889

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Estate of Hatten v. MonstedWisconsin Supreme Court · 1939
  2. Tillmann v. FlierlWisconsin Supreme Court · 1937
  3. Willett v. StewartWisconsin Supreme Court · 1938

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

Powered by the Exa API