Legal Opinion

Riedi v. Heinzl

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided March 12, 1942PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMartin, J.

If the complaint only states grounds for rescission or to set aside the conveyance for fraud, the judgment of dismissal was properly entered, because the right to rescind a contract on the ground of fraudulent representations could be exercised only by the one (Mathias Riedi, Sr.) upon whom the fraud was perpetrated. Upon his death, without such rescission, all power to rescind dies with him. However, a cause of action for deceit in inducing a conveyance survives the defrauded party’s death as “damages done to property rights,” within sec. 331.01, Stats.; but under sec. 287.01 it survives to…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Jones v. BillsteinWisconsin Supreme Court · 1871
  2. Campau v. CampauMichigan Supreme Court · 1869
  3. Zartner v. HolzhauerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1931
  4. Flood v. PilgrimWisconsin Supreme Court · 1873
  5. Marsh v. Board of SupervisorsWisconsin Supreme Court · 1875

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

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Dahlberg v. YoungSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1950
  2. Nichols v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1967
  3. Glojek v. GlojekWisconsin Supreme Court · 1948
  4. Estate of RiemanWisconsin Supreme Court · 1956
  5. Allison v. CurtisNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1957

6 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