Legal Opinion

Miller v. Anderson

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided March 11, 1924PublishedCited by 18 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

The following opinion was filed January 15, 1924:

Owen, J.

Defendant and respondent contends that the contract by which he agreed to give the plaintiff one half of what might be recovered upon the claim is void as being contrary to public policy, in that (a) it was champertous; (b) it held out an inducement to commit or induce the commission of fraud or perjury; and (c) it constituted an agreement whereby a person is to receive more than the statutory witness fees for appearing and testifying to facts within his knowledge.

That a champertous contract is void and will not be enforced is a trite…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Thomas v. CaulkettMichigan Supreme Court · 1885
  2. Dodge v. StilesSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1857
  3. Manufacturers & Merchants Inspection Bureau v. Everwear Hosiery Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1913
  4. Sherman v. BurtonMichigan Supreme Court · 1911
  5. Clifford v. HughesAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1910

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

3Cited by18 opinions

  1. Wright v. CorbinWashington Supreme Court · 1937
  2. Schara v. ThiedeWisconsin Supreme Court · 1973
  3. Griffith v. HarrisWisconsin Supreme Court · 1962
  4. Sparne v. AltshulerSupreme Court of Rhode Island · 1952
  5. Phillips Petroleum Co. v. Daniel Motor Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1941

13 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