Lenticular Europe, LLC v. Cunnally
Court of Appeals of Wisconsin
1Opinion of the CourtVergeront, J.
¶ 1. The dispositive issue on this appeal is whether John Van Leeuwen, a minority member of Lenticular Europe, LLC, was authorized to bring this action on behalf of the company. We conclude that Van Leeuwen was authorized to bring this action because: (1) no provision of the operating agreements override the "default" terms of Wxs. Stat. § 183.1101(1), 1 which therefore apply; and (2) the other member's interest in the outcome of this action was adverse to the interest of Lenticular Europe at the time this action was filed. Because the circuit court erroneously concluded that Van Leeuwen was…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- State Ex Rel. Kalal v. Circuit Court for Dane CountyWisconsin Supreme Court · 2004
- State ex rel. M.L.B. v. D.G.H.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1985
- In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings Against TrewinWisconsin Supreme Court · 2004
- Kurer v. Parke, Davis & Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 2004
- Town of Grand Chute v. Outagamie CountyCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 2004
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Daniel Marx v. Richard L. MorrisWisconsin Supreme Court · 2019
- Pum v. Wisconsin Physicians Service InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 2006
- Buke, LLC v. Cross Country Auto Sales, LLCNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 2014
- State v. JohnsonCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 2007
- Carhart-Halaska International, LLC v. Carhart, Inc.District Court, E.D. Wisconsin · 2013
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.