Legal Opinion

Harding v. Kumar

Court of Appeals of Wisconsin

Decided July 17, 2001No. 99-2030PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtFine, J.

¶ 1. The disputes in this case arose out of a real estate transaction. Darrell Harding sued Parmod Kumar, seeking to recover on a note that Harding alleged had been assigned to him by the person to whom Kumar had given the note. Kumar answered Harding's complaint and counterclaimed. Kumar also sued BSTY Inc., d/b/a Realty Executives, Harding's employer, and Chicago Insurance Company, BSTV's liability carrier, as well as Julius Kaulfuerst, alleged to be an employee of BSTY as third-party defendants. No separate claim was asserted against Chicago Insurance. Kaulfuerst is not a party to this…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Gross v. HoffmanWisconsin Supreme Court · 1938
  2. Truttschel v. MartinCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1997
  3. Radoff v. Red Owl Stores, Inc.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1982
  4. Edland v. Wisconsin Physicians Service Ins. Corp.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1997
  5. Trainor v. Aztalan Cycle Club, Inc.Court of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1988

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. State v. StenklyftWisconsin Supreme Court · 2005
  2. Contardi v. American Family Mutual InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 2004
  3. State v. StenklyftWisconsin Supreme Court · 2005

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

Powered by the Exa API