7 Wisconsin opinions name it 2 courts 1985–2004 0 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 |
|---|---|---|
Ollerman v. O'Rourke Co., Inc.green2 sentences2003"Under the benefit of the bargain rule, the measure of the purchaser's damages is typically stated as the difference between the value of the property as represented and its actual value as purchased." Ollerman, 94 Wis. 2d at 52-53 ; Wis JI— Civil 2405. 1988The supreme court held, "Under the benefit of the bargain rule, an alternative measure of recovery is the reasonable cost of placing the property received in the condition in which it was represented to be and the purchaser is not limited to the direct damage_” Id. at 53 , 288 N.W.2d at 112 . | 1 | 4 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Wisconsin. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Skrupky v. Elbert
green
2 sentences2004Skrupky, 189 Wis. 2d at 47 . ¶ 31. 2000Skrupky, 189 Wis. 2d at 47 , 526 N.W.2d at 270 . | 2 | 2000–2004 |
Gyldenvand v. Schroeder
green
1 sentence1985Id. | 1 | 1985–1985 |
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.