Maher v. Davis & Starr Lumber Co.
Wisconsin Supreme Court
APPEAL from the Circuit Court for Pepin County. The defendant corporation was located at Eau Claire, and had a mill at Durand in Pepin county, where the plaintiff resided.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from the Circuit Court for Pepin County. The defendant corporation was located at Eau Claire, and had a mill at Durand in Pepin county, where the plaintiff resided. On September 5,1800, the plaintiff made a proposition to the defendant in writing, to the effect that he would begin immediately to haul and deliver to the defendant, in its said mill yard, about 60,000 feet of lumber therein described, at the prices therein named, and complete such delivery on or before November 1, 1890; that the plaintiff should receive his pay for the amount hauled at the end of each week; that, if the…
1Opinion of the CourtCassoday, J.
The defendant took the requisite steps to secure the change of the place of trial from the county of Pepin to the county of Eau Claire, where the defendant was located. The cause having been commenced in the wrong county, the defendant, under the statutes, had the absolute right to the change; and hence the court would have had no right to retain the cause on the ground that the convenience of witnesses and the ends of justice would be thereby promoted. R. S. secs. 2621, 2624; Van Kleck v. Hanchett, 51 Wis. 398; Meiners v. Loeb, 64 Wis. 343. It follows that such change was properly made by…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Cartright v. Town of BelmontWisconsin Supreme Court · 1883
- Meiners v. LoebWisconsin Supreme Court · 1885
- Van Kleck v. HanchettWisconsin Supreme Court · 1881
3Cited by6 opinions
- Ott v. KelleyNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1934
- State Ex Rel. Klabacka v. CharlesWisconsin Supreme Court · 1967
- Case v. BeyerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1910
- Stahl v. BroeckertWisconsin Supreme Court · 1918
- Swan v. PorterWisconsin Supreme Court · 1897
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.