Legal Opinion

Smith v. Lingelbach

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided May 9, 1922PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtRosenberry, J.

The case is argued here upon both sides as if the rights of the parties were to be determined pursuant to the provisions of the Uniform Sales Act, and special reference is made to secs. 1684f — 19, 16841 — 42, 1684t — 63, and 1684f — 64, Stats.

After the trial and before the case was presented here the defendant died and the action was revived against F. J. Lin-gelbach, the administrator of his estate. The contention of the defendant is that the action is one for damages; that no damages were proven, and that the plaintiff cannot maintain an action for the purchase price, but that a recovery,…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. First National Bank v. HollandSupreme Court of Virginia · 1901
  2. Millard v. GreenSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1920
  3. Pratt v. S. Freeman & Sons Manufacturing Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1902
  4. Boyington v. SweeneyWisconsin Supreme Court · 1890
  5. Badger State Lumber Co. v. G. W. Jones Lumber Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1909

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

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Zamore v. WhittenSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1978
  2. Agar v. OrdaNew York Supreme Court · 1932
  3. Bigley v. BrandauWisconsin Supreme Court · 1973
  4. Porter v. GibsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1944
  5. Eckart v. BrownCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1939

6 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