Legal Opinion

Nolop v. Spettel

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided June 8, 1954PublishedCited by 22 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtFairchild, C. J.

Although there was never a written contract between the parties to this action, it is stipulated that they agreed to be bound by a written contract that had existed between the respondent and one Doctor Hulick, the pertinent portions of which contract follow:

“2. The owner agrees and covenants with the contractor to pay or cause to be paid to the contractor for the work performed, and the materials furnished by the contractor as follows:
“The actual net cost to the contractor of the materials actually furnished and labor and cartage actually performed by him hereunder on and for said building,…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Swedish American National Bank of Minneapolis v. KoebernickWisconsin Supreme Court · 1908
  2. Lytle, Campbell & Co. v. Somers, Fitler & Todd Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1923
  3. State v. Northwest Poultry & Egg Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1938
  4. Morse Dry Dock & Repair Co. v. Susquehanna S. S. Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1923
  5. Shaw v. G. B. Beaumont Co.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1917

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

3Cited by22 opinions

  1. Hanz Trucking, Inc. v. Harris Brothers Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1965
  2. Milas v. Labor Ass'n of Wisconsin, Inc.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1997
  3. Walberg v. StateWisconsin Supreme Court · 1976
  4. Attoe v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1967
  5. Davies v. J. D. Wilson Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1957

17 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