Entzminger v. Ford Motor Co.
Wisconsin Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtHallows, C. J.
The contentions of Ford deal with the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain the verdict. The dealership contract entered into in 1960 required the plaintiff to file what is known ' as basic orders each month. These are orders for cars to be held in stock and to be sold off the floor to customers who do not order specially. The contract also required the plaintiff to keep in stock one current-model passenger car, a car demonstrator and a truck demonstrator. The jury found the plaintiff failed to file monthly basic orders during the years from 1961 to 1965, inclusive, and failed to keep a car…
2Cases cited28 opinions
- Powers v. Allstate InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1960
- Gatzow v. BueningWisconsin Supreme Court · 1900
- Malco, Inc. v. Midwest Aluminum Sales, Inc.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1961
- Topolewski v. Plankinton Packing Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1910
- Lisowski v. ChenenoffWisconsin Supreme Court · 1968
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by35 opinions
- Wangen v. Ford Motor Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1980
- Management Computer Services, Inc. v. Hawkins, Ash, Baptie & Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1996
- Brown v. MaxeyWisconsin Supreme Court · 1985
- Fahrenberg v. TengelWisconsin Supreme Court · 1980
- Lievrouw v. RothCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1990
30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.