Thayer v. Hyne
Wisconsin Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtGehl, J.
The first question raised presents an issue of fact: Did defendant Hyne bind himself personally to perform the contract? The trial court found that he did, and we must follow the finding unless the decided preponderance of the evidence is to the contrary. There is a dispute in some of the testimony, and because of the findings we must assume that the facts relating to such issues are as contended by respondent. Nichols v. Galpin, 186 Wis. 485, 202 N. W. 153; In re Village of Chenequa, 197 Wis. 163, 221 N. W. 856.
The testimony of the plaintiff — some of it disputed, but none of it incredible —…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- In re Incorporation of the Village of ChenequaWisconsin Supreme Court · 1928
- Dudley v. WyeMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1918
- Whereatt v. EllisWisconsin Supreme Court · 1887
- Illges v. CongdonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1945
- Nichols v. GalpinWisconsin Supreme Court · 1925
3Cited by2 opinions
- Bigley v. BrandauWisconsin Supreme Court · 1973
- Larkin v. JohnsonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1975