Legal Opinion

Anglo American Mill Co. v. Wisconsin Hydro-Electric Co.

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided February 9, 1926PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtOwen, J.

The only right which the plaintiff has to recover is that which it secured by the assignment from Ludwig. Its conditional-sale contract was not filed or placed on record, so that the Hydro-Electric Company had no notice of plaintiff’s claim upon the mill by virtue of its conditional-sale contract, even though such filing would have constituted notice to a purchaser of the real estate that the mill was personal property and not a part of the freehold. A consideration of the case, therefore, involves only the right of the tenant, Ludwig, to recover possession of the mill. Undoubtedly as between…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Fuller-Warren Co. v. HarterWisconsin Supreme Court · 1901
  2. Second National Bank of Beloit, Wis. v. O. E. Merrill Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1887
  3. State ex rel. Gisholt Machine Co. v. NorsmanWisconsin Supreme Court · 1919
  4. Fitzgerald v. AndersonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1892
  5. Preston v. BriggsSupreme Court of Vermont · 1844

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Thomsen v. CullenWisconsin Supreme Court · 1928
  2. People's Savings & Trust Co. v. Sheboygan Machine Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1933
  3. Brunswick-Balke-Collender Co. v. Franzke-Schiffman Realty Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1933
  4. Northwestern Loan & Trust Co. v. Topp Oil & Supply Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1933
  5. Northwestern Loan & Trust Co. v. Topp Oil & Supply Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1933

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API