Legal Opinion

Schmalz v. McKenna

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided April 20, 1973No. 81PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

BeilfüSS, J.

We first consider the respondents’ claim of estoppel by record in the proceedings for admission of the will to probate. 3 The doctrine of estoppel by record prevents a party from litigating again what was actually litigated or might have been litigated in a former action. Gohr v. Beranek (1954), 266 Wis. 605, 64 N. W. 2d 246; Kuchenreuther v. Chicago, M., St. P. & P. R. Co. (1937), 225 Wis. 613, 275 N. W. 457. The constructive trust issue raised by the appellants in their objection to the admission of the will to probate could not be determined in that proceeding. The only…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Beatty v. . Guggenheim Exploration Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1919
  2. Cowie v. StrohmeyerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1912
  3. Nunnemacher v. StateWisconsin Supreme Court · 1906
  4. Richards v. RichardsWisconsin Supreme Court · 1973
  5. Kent v. KleinMichigan Supreme Court · 1958

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

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Prince v. BryantWisconsin Supreme Court · 1979
  2. Leimert v. McCannWisconsin Supreme Court · 1977
  3. Gorski v. GorskiWisconsin Supreme Court · 1978
  4. Hammes v. First National Bank & Trust Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1977
  5. First National Bank of Appleton v. NennigWisconsin Supreme Court · 1979

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