Legal Opinion

Armco Steel Corp. v. Hoppe

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided March 1, 1966PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHallows, J.

The trial court in denying a preferred status to the claim under sec. 289.536, Stats.,1 concluded that claimant Armco has no claim under the section be*218cause there has been no theft or misappropriation of the trust funds by Streu, the contractor. In so deciding, the trial court misread certain language in Hribar Trucking, Inc., v. State (1964), 22 Wis. (2d) 431, 435, 126 N. W. (2d) 52, to wit:

“To permit the respondent Hribar to qualify under sec. 289.536, Stats., the court would be required to make the tacit finding that Bonness had perpetrated a crime, since the statute is framed in terms of…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Murphy v. National Paving Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1938
  2. Morris F. Fox & Co. v. StateWisconsin Supreme Court · 1938
  3. Ozaukee Sand & Gravel Co. v. City of MilwaukeeWisconsin Supreme Court · 1943
  4. Danischefsky v. Klein-Watson Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1932
  5. Lehmann Tire & Supply, Inc. v. Mashuda Construction Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1961

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Loehrke v. Wanta Builders, Inc.Court of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1989
  2. Burmeister Woodwork Co. v. FriedelWisconsin Supreme Court · 1974
  3. Wisconsin Dairies Cooperative v. Citizens Bank & TrustWisconsin Supreme Court · 1991
  4. W.H. Major & Sons, Inc. v. KruegerCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1985
  5. Fischer Construction, LLC v. Ecker (In Re Ecker)United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Wisconsin · 2009

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API