Legal Opinion

Hudson Diesel, Inc. v. Kenall

Court of Appeals of Wisconsin

Decided May 2, 1995No. 94-2416PublishedCited by 24 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMyse, J.

Hudson Diesel, Inc. (Hudson) appeals an order dismissing its complaint for discovery viola tions. Hudson contends the trial court erred by dismissing the complaint because: (1) the discovery violations were inadvertent, not egregious; (2) it had a justifiable excuse for the violations; (3) the information that it failed to furnish was incidental to the principal issue in dispute; and (4) it was not given an opportunity to cure the defect. Because we conclude the facts do not support a finding that Hudson's conduct was intentional or egregious, that the information Hudson failed to supply was…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Green Spring Farms v. KerstenWisconsin Supreme Court · 1987
  2. Anderson v. Continental InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1978
  3. Grams v. BossWisconsin Supreme Court · 1980
  4. Johnson v. Allis Chalmers Corp.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1991
  5. Trispel v. HaeferWisconsin Supreme Court · 1979

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

3Cited by24 opinions

  1. Industrial Roofing Services, Inc. v. MarquardtWisconsin Supreme Court · 2007
  2. Schultz v. SykesCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 2001
  3. Teff v. Unity Health Plans Ins. Corp.Court of Appeals of Wisconsin · 2003
  4. State v. SmytheWisconsin Supreme Court · 1999
  5. State v. SmytheWisconsin Supreme Court · 1999

19 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