Dunlop v. Laitsch
Wisconsin Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtBrown, J.
Appellants are members of the Dunlop family. They will be referred to herein as “Dunlop.” Respondents are members of the Laitsch family and they will be referred to herein as “Laitsch.”
*38Dunlop and Laitsch owned adjoining real estate. A portion of their respective lands is low and swampy. The swamp is drained by a small stream. The two parties determined to improve their properties by damming the stream, impounding the water, and converting the swamp into a lake. To accomplish this purpose the parties entered into a written agreement, or agreements, which are the subject of this litigation. On…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Rosenfield v. United States Trust Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1935
- Machesky v. City of MilwaukeeWisconsin Supreme Court · 1934
- Kelley v. EllisWisconsin Supreme Court · 1956
3Cited by10 opinions
- Skycom Corporation and Gerald M. Walters v. Telstar CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1987
- Dairyland Greyhound Park, Inc. v. DoyleWisconsin Supreme Court · 2006
- Casati v. Aero Marine Management Co.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1976
- Herder Hallmark Consultants, Inc. v. Regnier Consulting Group, Inc.Court of Appeals of Wisconsin · 2004
- DENIL v. DeBOER, INC.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2011
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.