Hull v. Pfister & Vogel Leather Co.
Wisconsin Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtMartin, J.
The plaintiffs-appellants contend that the finding that “The management of the defendant has at all times proceeded with the liquidation in good faith and as rapidly as possible without undue sacrifice or waste and with the intent and purpose to complete the same as expeditiously as reasonably possible and at no time has the intent to proceed to a complete and final liquidation been abandoned,” is against the great weight and clear preponderance of the evidence and the inferences which must necessarily be drawn therefrom. Also that the finding that “All parties in interest have at all times…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Gaskill v. Gladys Belle Oil Co.Court of Chancery of Delaware · 1929
- Jermain v. Lake Shore & Michigan Southern Railway Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1883
- Roberts v. . Roberts-Wicks Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1906
- Commonwealth v. Commissioner of BanksMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1922
- Soehnlein v. SoehnleinWisconsin Supreme Court · 1911
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Estate of BealeWisconsin Supreme Court · 1962
- Franzen v. Fred Rueping Leather Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1949
- Albert Trostel & Sons Co. v. NotzCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2012
- Hamilton Mfg. Co. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1954
- Welch v. Land Development Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1944
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.