KRYL v. MECHALSON


259 Wis. 204 (1951)

KRYL, Appellant, v. MECHALSON, Respondent.

Supreme Court of Wisconsin.

May 8, 1951.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Tom Donoghue of Oconto, for the appellant.

E. B. Martineau of Marinette, for the respondent.


GEHL, J.

Plaintiff contends that a violation of the parol-evidence rule would result from receipt of the offered proof. Defendant replies to the contention that it was offered, not to vary the terms of the writing, but to show that the paper was not to become effective as a contract until the consent of the union and the approval of Mr. Quaal had been obtained.

We agree with the trial court that the testimony should...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases