Legal Opinion

Capitol Indemnity Corp. v. Morris

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided April 3, 1970No. 32PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWilkie, J.

But one issue is presented which is disposi-tive of this appeal: Did the trial court abuse its discretion in denying St. Paul’s petition to intervene in the state action ?

Since 1963, intervention in Wisconsin has been governed by sec. 260.205, Stats., which provides:

“If in an action for the recovery of property, a person not a party has an interest in the property, or if in any other action, a person not a party has such an interest in the subject matter of the controversy as requires him to be a party for his own protection, and such person applies to the court to be made a party, the court…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Muscoda Bridge Co. v. Worden-Allen Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1928
  2. Schatzman v. Town of GreenfieldWisconsin Supreme Court · 1956
  3. Fish Creek Park Co. v. Village of BaysideWisconsin Supreme Court · 1956
  4. Lodge 78 of International Ass'n of Machinists v. NickelWisconsin Supreme Court · 1963
  5. Hunt v. McDonaldWisconsin Supreme Court · 1905

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Mercantile Contract Purchase Corp. v. MelnickWisconsin Supreme Court · 1970
  2. Kornitz v. Commonwealth Land Title InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1978
  3. Hoppmann v. ReidWisconsin Supreme Court · 1979

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

Powered by the Exa API