Legal Opinion

Pierringer v. Hoger

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided October 29, 1963PublishedCited by 237 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHallows, J.

The releases were executed after the decision in Bielski v. Schulze (1962), 16 Wis. (2d) 1, 114 N. W. (2d) IOS, and are too long to quote verbatim. Each releases and discharges the respondents from all claims and causes of action of the plaintiff and recites the settlement was a compromise of the plaintiffs claims which exceeded the consideration paid and the plaintiff and the respondents knew the respondents were not paying the full amount of the plaintiff’s damages. Each release provided the plaintiff “does hereby credit and satisfy that portion of the total amount of damages of the…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Ellis v. EssonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1880
  2. Jacobs v. General Accident Fire & Life Assurance Corp.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1961
  3. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. Continental Casualty Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1953
  4. Patterson v. Edgerton Sand & Gravel Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1938
  5. Kropidlowski v. Pfister & Vogel Leather Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1912

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

3Cited by237 opinions

  1. American Motorcycle Assn. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1978
  2. Quick v. CraneIdaho Supreme Court · 1986
  3. Paul Handeen v. Gregory A. Lemaire Henry Lemaire Patricia Lemaire, Orlins & Brainerd Law Firm Richard K. Brainerd Peter I. OrlinsCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1997
  4. Cartel Capital Corp. v. Fireco of New JerseySupreme Court of New Jersey · 1980
  5. Rockweit v. SenecalWisconsin Supreme Court · 1995

232 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