Legal Opinion

Kennedy-Ingalls Corp. v. Meissner

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided October 7, 1958PublishedCited by 26 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtCurrie, J.

The two questions presented on this appeal are: (1) Do the facts as pleaded in Smith’s proposed complaint and in Kennedy-Ingalls’ amended complaint establish that *104Smith has been subrogated to part of Kennedy-Ingalls’ cause of action against the defendants ?(2) If the foregoing question be answered in the affirmative, is Smith entitled as a matter of right, and not discretion, to intervene in the action instituted by Kennedy-Ingalls against the defendants?

In passing on the issue of subrogation, which Smith contends arose out of the compromise settlement of the prior James action, it is…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Vasu v. Kohlers, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1945
  2. Patitucci v. GerhardtWisconsin Supreme Court · 1932
  3. Cohan v. Associated Fur Farms, Inc.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1952
  4. Stroh v. O'HearnMichigan Supreme Court · 1913
  5. First National Bank v. SchrubenSupreme Court of Kansas · 1928

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

3Cited by26 opinions

  1. Dippel v. ScianoWisconsin Supreme Court · 1967
  2. Smith v. Atco Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1959
  3. D'ANGELO v. Cornell Paperboard Products Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1963
  4. West American Ins. Co. v. Yellow Cab Co.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 1986
  5. The Dow Chemical Corporation v. Weevil-Cide Company, Inc. Research Products Company Hartford Accident & Indemnity CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1990

21 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