BUNBURY v. KRAUSS

No. 85.

41 Wis.2d 522 (1969)

164 N.W.2d 473

BUNBURY and wife, Appellants, v. KRAUSS and another, Respondents.

Supreme Court of Wisconsin.

Decided February 7, 1969.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

For the appellants there were briefs and oral argument by Richard R. Rynders of Madison.

For the respondents there was a brief by Croak & Croak of Madison, and oral argument by Martin L. Croak.


HEFFERNAN, J.

Bunbury argues that the evidence fails to show an oral contract supplanting the payment terms of the land contract. He argues that the parol evidence rule excludes the evidence relied upon by the court to support its findings; and, in any event, since the statute of frauds requires a contract transferring an interest in real estate to be in writing, the oral modification, if in fact agreed upon, is in violation of the statute of frauds and void.

...

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