Telefunken Sales Corp. v. Kokal
Wisconsin Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtHeffernan, J.
We are satisfied that the evidence adduced by Telefunken was sufficient to show a prima facie case. In the defendant’s answer, she contended that there had been no indebtedness to Telefunken as alleged in the complaint and that no payment had been made on these accounts. The testimony of MacFall was clearly sufficient to show that the indebtedness had been incurred and that the accounts in fact existed. The plaintiff sustained its burden of showing the existence of these accounts, alleged in its complaint. The defendant, by failing to dispute the existence of the accounts by putting in…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Baehr v. BuellWisconsin Supreme Court · 1907
- Silva v. LinnemanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1946
- DEBELAK BROS., INC. v. MilleWisconsin Supreme Court · 1968
- O'Connor v. EganMissouri Court of Appeals · 1955
- Cumberland Grocery Co. v. YorkCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 1929
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Chrysler Corp. v. Airtemp Corp.Superior Court of Delaware · 1980
- Edmonds v. Valley National Bank of ArizonaWyoming Supreme Court · 1974