Legal Opinion

Massey v. Richmond

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided May 10, 1932PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtRosenberry, C. J.

Before entering upon a consideration of the questions presented upon these appeals, reference should be made to a few fundamental principles of law. First, in order to entitle a person seeking to set aside a conveyance on the ground of fraud, proof of the wrong should be clear, satisfactory, and convincing. Richards v. Millard, 146 Wis. 552, 131 N. W. 365; De Groot v. Veldboom, 167 Wis. 107, 166 N. W. 662; Putterman v. Goldman, 197 Wis. 233, 221 N. W. 650.

The evidence of fraudulent conduct on the part of Massey consists almost entirely of insinuations and charges, and we search the record in…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Carey v. DyerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1897
  2. Farmers Exchange Bank v. Oneida Motor Truck Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1930
  3. Evans v. RugeeWisconsin Supreme Court · 1883
  4. Richards v. MillardWisconsin Supreme Court · 1911
  5. Sawyer v. MettersWisconsin Supreme Court · 1907

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Berk v. Milwaukee Automobile InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1944
  2. Miller v. LangeWisconsin Supreme Court · 1940
  3. Angers v. SabatinelliWisconsin Supreme Court · 1944
  4. Kerbet v. BehlingWisconsin Supreme Court · 1953
  5. Waukesha County Department of Social Services v. LoperWisconsin Supreme Court · 1972

2 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