Estate of Briese
Wisconsin Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtFritz, J.
The respondent, Martha Briese, contends that the'trial court’s order suppressing the taking of an adverse examination under sec. 326.12, Stats., is not an appealable order, and in support of her motion to dismiss the appeal therefrom, she relies upon the decisions in State ex rel. Finnegan v. Lincoln Dairy Co. 221 Wis. 15, 17, 265 N. W. 202; Milwaukee Corrugating Co. v. Flagge, 170 Wis. 492, 175 N. W. 777; Hyslop v. Hyslop, 234 Wis. 430, 291 N. W. 337. Appellants contend that the order refuses a provisional remedy and therefore it is an appealable order under the provision in sec. 274.33 (3),…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Milwaukee Corrugating Co. v. FlaggeWisconsin Supreme Court · 1920
- Hyslop v. HyslopWisconsin Supreme Court · 1940
- Phipps v. Wisconsin Central Railway Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1907
- State ex rel. Finnegan v. Lincoln Dairy Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1936
3Cited by4 opinions
- Wright v. HasleyWisconsin Supreme Court · 1979
- State Ex Rel. Opelt v. CrispWisconsin Supreme Court · 1977
- Condura Construction Co. v. Milwaukee Building & Construction Trades CouncilWisconsin Supreme Court · 1959
- Buchen v. Wisconsin Tobacco Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1973