Bratt v. Peterson
Wisconsin Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtWilkie, J.
Three issues are presented on this appeal:
1. Is the June 21st extension void under the statute of frauds ?
*4512. Is appellant estopped from raising a defense based on the statute of frauds ?
3. Is the option so vague and uncertain as to be unenforceable?
Since the case comes to us on demurrer we must assume that all facts pleaded in the amended answer are true.1
Statute of Frauds.
Consideration must first be given to determining whether, in terms of general contract law, there was a binding agreement between the Schnells and Peterson. An option to purchase is a continuing promise or offer given by the…
2Cases cited27 opinions
- City of Milwaukee v. Milwaukee CountyWisconsin Supreme Court · 1965
- Brandeis v. NeustadtlWisconsin Supreme Court · 1860
- Telford v. FrostWisconsin Supreme Court · 1890
- Kreutzer v. LynchWisconsin Supreme Court · 1904
- Wall v. Minneapolis, St. Paul & Sault Ste. Marie Railway Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1893
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by34 opinions
- Saviano v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1983
- U.S. Oil Co. v. Midwest Auto Care Services, Inc.Court of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1989
- Kocinski v. Home Insurance Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1990
- Kuhfeld v. KuhfeldSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1980
- Bunbury v. KraussWisconsin Supreme Court · 1969
29 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.