1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. Wis.2d
  4. 9 Wis.2d
  5. 9 Wis.2d 57 (1960)
 

BLUMENFELD v. EICHENBAUM

9 Wis.2d 57 (1960)

BLUMENFELD, Appellant, v. EICHENBAUM, Respondent.

Supreme Court of Wisconsin.

January 5, 1960.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

For the appellant there was a brief by Rubin, Ruppa & Wegner of Milwaukee, and oral argument by Nathan Ruppa.

For the respondent there was a brief by Hersh & Magidson of Milwaukee, and oral argument by Arthur B. Magidson.

BROADFOOT, J.

Upon the first appeal in this case the judgment of the trial court was affirmed with one exception. That exception dealt with the attorneys' fees and costs allowed to the plaintiff. The basis for the disallowance of the attorneys' fees and costs was that the notice required by sec. 276.27, Stats., had not been complied with. No notice had been served upon the defendant. We held that the statute is mandatory and attorneys' fees and costs could not be...

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