Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

238 Wis. 2d 844

Rumage v. Gullberg

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided October 19, 2000

Wisconsin Supreme Court · decided 2000-10-19

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently May 2021

1 state decisions

Relies on Rumage v. Gullberg

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 2000-10-19

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

PER CURIAM,

¶1¶ 1. (on motion for reconsideration). Plaintiff-Appellant Donald Rumage moves for reconsideration of our decision in Rumage v. Gullberg, 2000 WI 53, 235 Wis. 2d 279, 611 N.W.2d 458, on grounds that the court overlooked a controlling fact appearing in the record. Rumage argues that Reinier Kemeling sold his residential property in a voluntary private sale, during a mortgage foreclosure redemption period, in contemplation of an imminent sheriffs sale. He argues that a sale under these circumstances was a sale under "compulsion," not an arms-length transaction under no compulsion that produces fair market value.

¶2*845¶ 2. After careful consideration, we conclude that appellant's argument is without merit in this case. In ¶ 45 of the court's opinion we state: "Judge Simanek found no evidence of collusion or fraud between Kemel-ing and Burmeister." This sentence is herewith amended to read: "Judge Simanek found no evidence of compulsion, collusion or fraud between Kemeling and Burmeister." The record does not demonstrate that the circuit court's finding was clearly erroneous.

¶3¶ 3. The motion for reconsideration is denied without costs.

/238/wis2d/844 · .json · Public domain