Krause v. Hartwig
| Decision Date | 03 October 1961 |
| Citation | 111 N.W.2d 138,14 Wis.2d 281 |
| Parties | Alfred L. KRAUSE, Sole trader, d/b/a Al Krause Construction, Respondent, v. Clarence HARTWIG et al., Appellants. |
| Court | Wisconsin Supreme Court |
An action for reformation of two lien waivers executed by the plaintiff, Alfred L. Krause, under dated of April 9, 1959, and May 20, 1959. The plaintiff-respondent, a building contractor, agreed orally prior to December 1, 1958, to construct a house for the defendants-appellants upon real estate owned by them in the village of Johnson Creek. The plaintiff commenced work on this house on December 1, 1958, and completed it on or about June 4, 1959.
On April 9, 1959, and again on May 20, 1959, the plaintiff gave the defendants a waiver of lien for work accomplished to date as well as for all labor and materials to be furnished in the future. The two waivers did not include a property description. On October 28, 1959, the plaintiff filed a contractor's lien with the clerk of the circuit court for Jefferson county against defendants' property in the amount of $5,942.41.
The original complaint was to foreclose the mechanic's lien and included the legal description of the property. The original answer admits the description of the property contained in the complaint and sets up a series of defenses in addition to the waivers of lien. The answer also requests dismissal of the complaint and for the establishment of the true indebtedness of the defendants after offsetting damages sustained by the defendants arising out of defective workmanship. A stipulation was entered into between the parties amending the plaintiff's complaint for reformation of the two waivers. The amended complaint alleged that the waivers were intended by the parties to waive any claim for mechanic's lien which the plaintiff had for work, material and service furnished and performed by plaintiff prior to April 6, 1959, and that the waivers of lien were not intended to apply to or waive plaintiff's claim for mechanic's lien for any work, services and materials furnished and performed by plaintiff on and after April 6, 1959. The demand and prayer for judgment ask that the waivers of lien executed by the plaintiff under dates of April 9, 1959, and May 20, 1959, be reformed so as to conform to the actual intention of the parties and not to act as a waiver for any work, material and services furnished and performed on or after April 6, 1959.
The defendant moved for summary judgment and in support of his motion set up the two waivers of lien executed by the plaintiff.
The plaintiff's affidavit in opposition to the motion for summary judgment alleges that in April, 1959, the defendant requested waivers of lien for all work previously done and materials furnished by the sub-contractors and informed plaintiff that this was done at the request of the banks holding the mortgage against the premises, and that the banks would not release the money until they had waivers. The plaintiff executed and delivered to the defendant the following waiver dated April 9, 1959:
'Whereas, I, Al Krause Construction Co., the undersigned, have contracted with Clarence Hartwig, Clarence Hartwig Residence to furnish material and/or perform services, to enter in the erection, construction, alteration and repair of certain improvements, now in progress or about to be begun, upon the following described real estate, situated in the county of Jefferson, state of Wisconsin, to wit:
'Now, therefore, I, the undersigned, Al Krause...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Olson v. Wis. Mut. Ins. Co.
...an equitable remedy that exists to effectuate the parties’ intentions at the time they entered into a contract. Krause v. Hartwig , 14 Wis. 2d 281, 284, 111 N.W.2d 138 (1961). "A mutual mistake made by the parties to the instrument which would defeat such intentions should be corrected in e......
-
Bailey v. Hovde
...of equitable jurisdiction is to effectuate the intentions of the parties to the instrument in question. . . .' Krause v. Hartwig (1961), 14 Wis.2d 281, 284, 111 N.W.2d 138, 140. "This court in Chicago, St. P., M. & O.R. Co. v. Bystrom (1917), 165 Wis. 125, 161 N.W. 358, laid down the rule w......
-
State Bank of La Crosse v. Elsen
...is inapplicable and does not justify the award. Because a claim for reformation is an equitable action, Krause v. Hartwig, 14 Wis.2d 281, 284, 111 N.W.2d 138, 140 (1961), the Elsens assert that the award is proper under White v. Ruditys, 117 Wis.2d 130, 142, 343 N.W.2d 421, 427 (Ct.App. 198......
-
Schmid v. Utica Mut. Ins.
...to provide limits of $25,000 per person and $500,000 per occurrence. Reformation is an equitable remedy. Krause v. Hartwig, 14 Wis.2d 281, 284, 111 N.W.2d 138, 140 (1961). It will only be granted when, because of fraud or a mutual mistake, a contract fails to accurately reflect the agreemen......