Sullivan v. Compressed Air Renovator & Sweeper Manufacturing Co.

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Sullivan v. Compressed Air Renovator & Sweeper Manufacturing Co.

111 N.W. 73, 131 Wis. 134, 1907 Wisc. LEXIS 194

DecidedMarch 19, 1907

StatusPublished

This text of 111 N.W. 73 (Sullivan v. Compressed Air Renovator & Sweeper Manufacturing Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Wisconsin Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Sullivan v. Compressed Air Renovator & Sweeper Manufacturing Co., 111 N.W. 73, 131 Wis. 134, 1907 Wisc. LEXIS 194 (Wis. 1907).

Pincite

Opinion

Cassoday, C. J.

Tbe findings of tbe court as set forth in the foregoing statement are amply sustained by tbe evidence. Tbe facts so established make it very clear that tbe plaintiff is not entitled to any relief in this action. It is quite obvious that the failure to successfully manufacture and sell tbe machines covered by tbe invention was owing to a want of cash capital. In fact, tbe plaintiff testified to tbe effect that to make a success out of tbe business required $10,000 or $15,000 of cash capital. Of course, this could not be supplied by issuing paid-up or partially paid-up capital stock to tbe owners of tbe invention as consideration therefor. Tbe method of raising tbe requisite cash capital is, of course, a matter of business policy and administration.

By the Court. — Tbe judgment of tbe circuit court is affirmed.

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

Cassoday, C. J.

Tbe findings of tbe court as set forth in the foregoing statement are amply sustained by tbe evidence. Tbe facts so established make it very clear that tbe plaintiff is not entitled to any relief in this action. It is quite obvious that the failure to successfully manufacture and sell tbe machines covered by tbe invention was owing to a want of cash capital. In fact, tbe plaintiff testified to tbe effect that to make a success out of tbe business required $10,000 or $15,000 of cash capital. Of course, this could not be supplied by issuing paid-up or partially paid-up capital stock to tbe owners of tbe invention as consideration therefor. Tbe method of raising tbe requisite cash capital is, of course, a matter of business policy and administration.

By the Court. — Tbe judgment of tbe circuit court is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

111 N.W. 73, 131 Wis. 134, 1907 Wisc. LEXIS 194, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sullivan-v-compressed-air-renovator-sweeper-manufacturing-co-wis-1907.