Henika v. Heinemann

63 N.W. 1047, 90 Wis. 478, 1895 Wisc. LEXIS 302
Wisconsin Supreme Court·Decided June 20, 1895·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

Pinney, J.

. The order appealed from was made before the decision of Nonotuck Silk Co. v. Flanders, 87 Wis. 237, and In re Plankinton Bank, 87 Wis. 378. For the reason that the trust property or fund sought to be recovered by the petitioner could not be traced and followed into any property or money which came to the hands of the receiver, his case wholly failed. His right to recover depended upon tracing such property, or the proceeds thereof, into some property or fund which came to the hands of the receiver. Burnham v. Barth, 89 Wis. 362.

By the Court.— The order of the circuit court is reversed, •and the cause remanded with directions to dismiss the petition.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Henika v. Heinemann, 63 N.W. 1047, 90 Wis. 478, 1895 Wisc. LEXIS 302 (Wis. 1895).

63 N.W. 1047 (Henika v. Heinemann) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Steinmann v. Steinmann
2008 WI 43 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 2008)
In Re Mueller Travel Agency, Inc.
201 N.W.2d 589 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1972)
Simonson v. Mc Invaille
166 N.W.2d 155 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1969)
Cherry v. Territory of Oklahoma
1906 OK 49 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1906)
Stevens v. Williams
64 N.W. 422 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1895)