Legal Opinion

Hausmann v. Wittemann

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided February 2, 1965PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHeffernan, J.

The appellant, Wittemann, argues that the trial court was in error in failing to find that the contract was rescinded by the mutual consent of the parties. We agree with this contention, and we accordingly reverse the trial court and direct that the action for specific performance be dismissed.

We arrive at this result since a review of the record indicates the trial court’s decision is contrary to the great weight and clear preponderance of the evidence. Nehls v. Nehls (1963), 21 Wis. (2d) 231, 124 N. W. (2d) 18. Whether the contract was rescinded poses a question of fact to be determined…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Nehls v. NehlsWisconsin Supreme Court · 1963
  2. Douglass v. RansomWisconsin Supreme Court · 1931

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Delap v. Institute of America, Inc.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1966
  2. Krueger v. SteffenWisconsin Supreme Court · 1966
  3. Ricchio v. OberstWisconsin Supreme Court · 1977
  4. Weed v. LepiankaWisconsin Supreme Court · 1966

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

Powered by the Exa API