RIEPL v. SARDINO


262 Wis. 670 (1953)

RIEPL and wife, Respondents, vs. SARDINO and another, Appellants.

Supreme Court of Wisconsin.

January 6, 1953.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

For the appellants there were briefs by Charles Saggio, attorney, and Brooke Tibbs and Howard H. Boyle, Jr., of counsel, all of Milwaukee, and oral argument by Mr. Boyle and Mr. Tibbs.

William J. Keating and Oscar M. Binn, both of Milwaukee, for the respondents.


GEHL, J.

The trial judge was of the opinion that the portion of the note quoted above is indefinite and uncertain and therefore unenforceable.

Defendants contend that it must be construed to mean that so long as there is no default in payments of interest, taxes, and insurance premiums they have as much time as they desire to pay the principal sum. Their construction would make the contract most unusual and extraordinary. It seems to us to be unlikely that...

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