Legal Opinion

Nagel v. Philipsen

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided May 6, 1958PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtCuerie, J.

The plaintiffs Nagel have served no brief and are in default on this appeal. On the date set for argument counsel for the defendants moved for reversal under Supreme Court Rule 32 (sec. 251.32, Stats.). It lies within the discretion of this court whether to grant such motion. This court is somewhat hesitant to perfunctorily reverse a judgment of a trial court which undoubtedly gave the case careful consideration before entering such judgment. Upon examination of the record on this appeal we have concluded that it is one which should be disposed of on the merits, and not under Supreme Court…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Smith v. BachusSupreme Court of Alabama · 1915
  2. Cooper v. SlaughterSupreme Court of Alabama · 1912
  3. Thiel v. DamrauWisconsin Supreme Court · 1954
  4. Wollman v. RuehleWisconsin Supreme Court · 1899
  5. Oliver v. OliverSupreme Court of Alabama · 1914

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

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Production Credit Ass'n of Mandan v. Terra Vallee, Inc.North Dakota Supreme Court · 1981
  2. Buza v. WojtalewiczWisconsin Supreme Court · 1970
  3. Chandelle Enterprises, LLC v. XLNT Dairy Farm, Inc.Court of Appeals of Wisconsin · 2005
  4. Beasley v. KonczalWisconsin Supreme Court · 1979
  5. Seybold v. BurkeWisconsin Supreme Court · 1961

5 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