Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
10 Wisconsin opinions name it 2 courts 1983–2021 1 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Wisconsin courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Hoffman v. Ralston Purina Co.green2 sentences2021“An ‘accord and satisfaction’ is an agreement to discharge an existing disputed claim and constitutes a defense to an action to enforce a claim,” “whether the claim be one arising in contract, tort, or otherwise.” Hoffman v. Ralston Purina Co., 86 Wis. 2d 445, 453 , 273 N.W.2d 214 (1979); see also Butler v. Kocisko, 166 Wis. 2d 212, 215 , 479 N.W.2d 208 (Ct. App. 1991). 2021“An ‘accord and satisfaction’ is an agreement to discharge an existing disputed claim and constitutes a defense to an action to enforce a claim,” “whether the claim be one arising in contract, tort, or otherwise.” Hoffman v. Ralston Purina Co., 86 Wis. 2d 445, 453 , 273 N.W.2d 214 (1979); see also Butler v. Kocisko, 166 Wis. 2d 212, 215 , 479 N.W.2d 208 (Ct. App. 1991). | 3 | 6 |
Butler v. Kociskogreen2 sentences2021“An ‘accord and satisfaction’ is an agreement to discharge an existing disputed claim and constitutes a defense to an action to enforce a claim,” “whether the claim be one arising in contract, tort, or otherwise.” Hoffman v. Ralston Purina Co., 86 Wis. 2d 445, 453 , 273 N.W.2d 214 (1979); see also Butler v. Kocisko, 166 Wis. 2d 212, 215 , 479 N.W.2d 208 (Ct. App. 1991). 2021“An ‘accord and satisfaction’ is an agreement to discharge an existing disputed claim and constitutes a defense to an action to enforce a claim,” “whether the claim be one arising in contract, tort, or otherwise.” Hoffman v. Ralston Purina Co., 86 Wis. 2d 445, 453 , 273 N.W.2d 214 (1979); see also Butler v. Kocisko, 166 Wis. 2d 212, 215 , 479 N.W.2d 208 (Ct. App. 1991). | 1 | 2 |
Flambeau Products Corp. v. Honeywell Information Systems, Inc.green2 sentences2020Sys., Inc., 116 Wis. 2d 95, 112 , 341 N.W.2d 655 (1984) ("An 'accord and satisfaction' is an agreement to discharge an existing disputed claim; it constitutes a defense to an action to enforce the claim." (citation omitted)). 1 No. 2018AP875.dk to a majority of the court, accord and satisfaction is not an available defense because victims cannot release the defendant from whatever it is the state is doing when it imposes a restitution order. 2020Sys., Inc., 116 Wis. 2d 95, 112 , 341 N.W.2d 655 (1984) ("An 'accord and satisfaction' is an agreement to discharge an existing disputed claim; it constitutes a defense to an action to enforce the claim." (citation omitted)). 1 No. 2018AP875.dk to a majority of the court, accord and satisfaction is not an available defense because victims cannot release the defendant from whatever it is the state is doing when it imposes a restitution order. | 1 | 2 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Wisconsin. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Superior Builders, Inc. v. Large
neutral
2 sentences2020Superior Builders, Inc. v. Large, 52 Wis. 2d 563, 565-66 , 190 N.W.2d 901 (1971). "[A]ccord and satisfaction is an agreement to discharge an existing disputed claim and constitutes a defense to an action to enforce the claim." Parsons ex rel Cabaniss v. Am. 2020Superior Builders, Inc. v. Large, 52 Wis. 2d 563, 565-66 , 190 N.W.2d 901 (1971). "[A]ccord and satisfaction is an agreement to discharge an existing disputed claim and constitutes a defense to an action to enforce the claim." Parsons ex rel Cabaniss v. Am. | 1 | 2020–2020 |
Cook & Franke, SC v. Meilman
green
2 sentences2016It is a contract that requires an offer, acceptance, and consideration." Cook & Franke, S.C. v. Meilman, 136 Wis. 2d 434, 438 , 402 N.W.2d 361 (Ct. App. 1987). 2016It is a contract that requires an offer, acceptance, and consideration." Cook & Franke, S.C. v. Meilman, 136 Wis. 2d 434, 438 , 402 N.W.2d 361 (Ct. App. 1987). | 1 | 2016–2016 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.