Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

Torts — tortious interference with contract — sufficiency of the evidence

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//January 29, 2013//

Torts — tortious interference with contract — sufficiency of the evidence

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//January 29, 2013//

Listen to this article

Wisconsin Court of Appeals

Civil

Torts — tortious interference with contract — sufficiency of the evidence

Daniel Rittenhouse appeals the judgment in his contract action against David Hulce, Ron Hulce, and Michael Begres. The case has a complex procedural history. Rittenhouse challenges several decisions or orders that resulted in the dismissal of his claims against Ron and Begres. As to Begres, we reverse and remand with directions that the original jury verdict against him be reinstated. As to Ron, we affirm. This opinion will not be published.

2011AP2918 Rittenhouse v. Hulce, et al.

Dist III, Brown County, Warpinski, J., Per Curiam

Attorneys: For Appellant: Ostrow, Winston A., Green Bay; Smies, Jonathan T., Green Bay; For Respondent: Curry, I. Gregg , IV, Appleton; Olivares, E. Jay, Norway, MI

Polls

Should Wisconsin Supreme Court rules be amended so attorneys can't appeal license revocation after 5 years?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Legal News

See All Legal News

WLJ People

Sea all WLJ People

Opinion Digests