Repinski v. Clintonville Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n
Wisconsin Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtHallows, C. J.
When there is credible evidence which under any reasonable view fairly admits of an inference which is sufficient to support the jury’s finding, the trial court should not change the finding. Rodenkirch v. Johnson (1960), 9 Wis. 2d 245, 248, 101 N. W. 2d 83; Kinsman v. Panek (1968), 40 Wis. 2d 408, 414, 162 N. W. 2d 27. Consequently, we must review the evidence to determine whether it was error for the trial court to change the answer in the verdict.
In July, 1966, Clintonville and the Repinskis entered into an agreement for a mortgage loan for the construction of a new home in Outagamie…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Dehnart v. Waukesha Brewing Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1963
- Jost v. Dairyland Power CooperativeWisconsin Supreme Court · 1969
- Ernst v. GreenwaldWisconsin Supreme Court · 1967
- Rodenkirch v. JohnsonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1960
- Weinhagen v. HayesWisconsin Supreme Court · 1922
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- United Telecommunications, Inc., a Kansas Corporation v. American Television and Communications Corporation, a Delaware CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1976
- Thorp Sales Corp. v. Gyuro Grading Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1983
- Toulon v. NagleWisconsin Supreme Court · 1975
- Jack Ma, a Subject of the Republic of China v. The Community Bank, a Wisconsin Banking CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1982
- Yost v. City of Council BluffsSupreme Court of Iowa · 1991
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.