Young v. Lynch
Wisconsin Supreme Court
APPEAL from the Circuit Court for Washington County. The case is stated in the opinion. They argued, among other things, that in this class of cases, upon a motion to have the complaint made more definite and certain, the plaintiff will be required to set out the particular facts constituting the negligence complained of, at least so far as they would appear to be properly within his knowledge.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from the Circuit Court for Washington County. The case is stated in the opinion. They argued, among other things, that in this class of cases, upon a motion to have the complaint made more definite and certain, the plaintiff will be required to set out the particular facts constituting the negligence complained of, at least so far as they would appear to be properly within his knowledge. This has been repeatedly decided in cases where the complaint was held good on general demurrer. Jeffersonville, M. <& 1. li. Co. v. Dunlap, 29 Ind. 426; Cincinnati, H. do D. R. Co. v. Chester, 57 id.…
1Opinion of the CourtTaylor, J.
This action is brought- by the plaintiff and respondent against the defendant and appellant, who is a physician and surgeon, to recover damages for the alleged malpractice of the defendant in and about the setting and caring for certain fractured bones of the plaintiff. After twenty days from the time of the service of the complaint in the action, but within the time the defendant had to answer by the written stipulation of the plaintiff, the defendant made a motion requiring the plaintiff to make his •complaint more definite and certain. Among other things the motion asked that the plaintiff…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Grannis v. HookerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1871
- Redmon v. Phœnix Fire InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1881
- Flanders v. McVickarWisconsin Supreme Court · 1859
- Fitts v. WaldeckWisconsin Supreme Court · 1881
- Haseltine v. SimpsonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1883
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Chicago City Railway Co. v. JenningsIllinois Supreme Court · 1895
- Cederson v. Oregon Navigation Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1900
- Hills v. ShawOregon Supreme Court · 1913
- Triay v. SealsSupreme Court of Florida · 1923
- Goldman v. Home Mutual Insurance CompaniesWisconsin Supreme Court · 1964
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.