Legal Opinion

Jefferis v. Austin

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided December 11, 1923PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtEschweiler, J.

It is conceded that if the liability of the defendant Mrs. Austin is to be determined under the lav/ of Wisconsin as it stood at the time of the making of *205these notes her defense oí coverture is good. If, however, the question is to be- detérmined under the law of the state of Illinois, the holding of the trial court that she is liable must be sustained. 'Such being the conceded situation, no reference to the several statutes or decisions of the two states on those points is necessary.

The notes express to be made at Chicago and presumptively were delivered there.. They are made payable at…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Milliken v. PrattMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1878
  2. International Harvester Co. of America v. McAdamWisconsin Supreme Court · 1910
  3. Brown v. GatesWisconsin Supreme Court · 1904
  4. Hackley National Bank v. BarryWisconsin Supreme Court · 1909
  5. Browns Valley State Bank v. PorterCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1916

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

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Bush v. National School Studios, Inc.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1987
  2. Cintas Corp. No. 2 v. Becker Property Services LLCWisconsin Supreme Court · 2018
  3. First Wisconsin National Bank of Madison v. NicolaouCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1978
  4. LaPlant v. Northwestern Mutual Life InsuranceCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2012
  5. MC Cloud Construction, Inc. v. Home Depot USA, Inc.District Court, E.D. Wisconsin · 2001

9 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