Legal Opinion · Dissent

Manor Enterprises, Inc. v. Vivid, Inc.

Court of Appeals of Wisconsin

Decided May 20, 1999No. 98-1709Published

1DissentRoggensack, J.

I conclude that the circuit court properly granted summary judgment in Vivid's favor on the trespass claim because the lease of the sign constituted a bailment; and therefore, the responsibilities of Vivid and MEI in regard to the bailed property are either controlled by the agreement in fact of the parties or by an implied contract determined by the common law of bailment. Because there was no agreement in fact that assigned the responsibility to return or reclaim the bailed property, and because the common law does not obligate Vivid to reclaim the bailed property, I would adopt comment n…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Noll v. Dimiceli's, Inc.Court of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1983
  2. Burns v. StateWisconsin Supreme Court · 1911
  3. Madison Newspapers, Inc. v. Pinkerton's Inc.Court of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1996
  4. Oconto Electric Co. v. Peoples Land & Manuf'g Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1917
  5. Wm. G. Tannhaeuser Co. v. Holiday House, Inc.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1957

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