Malinowski v. Moss
Wisconsin Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtCrownhart, J.
The trial court refused to entertain a motion for a new trial after verdict and judgment, on the ground that he had no jurisdiction to do' so under the statute creating the court, ch. 244, Laws of 1921. ' This statute was before this court in La Bowe v. Balthazor, 180 Wis. 419, 193 N. W. 244, where the jury fee was held to be a violation of the constitutional guaranty of jury trial. The statute was thereafter amended (ch. 187, Laws of 1923) to provide for a constitutional jury. The appellants contend that the statute should be construed to give the municipal court power to grant a new trial,…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Capital Traction Co. v. HofSupreme Court of the United States · 1899
- State ex rel. Carnation Milk Products Co. v. EmeryWisconsin Supreme Court · 1922
- Davis v. HudsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1881
- Thoe v. Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1923
- Opinion of the Justices to the SenateMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1911
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- In re CannonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1932
- In Re Hon. Charles E. KadingWisconsin Supreme Court · 1975
- Thompson v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1976
- City of Madison v. Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul & Pacific RailroadWisconsin Supreme Court · 1958
- Peterson v. WingertsmanWisconsin Supreme Court · 1961
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.