Montreal River Lumber Co. v. Mihills
Wisconsin Supreme Court
APPEAL from the Circuit Court for Dane County. It is undisputed that during the times mentioned the plaintiff was a corporation at Hurley, "Wis., and had a mill about ■ three miles distant from that place, at Gile, which was completed in May, 1888, and also had a large quantity of pine timber lying upon the west branch of the Montreal river and on the Potato river, in the vicinity of said mill; that Alexander Stewart, of "Wausau, was the treasurer of said corporation; that…
Read the full summary
APPEAL from the Circuit Court for Dane County. It is undisputed that during the times mentioned the plaintiff was a corporation at Hurley, "Wis., and had a mill about ■ three miles distant from that place, at Gile, which was completed in May, 1888, and also had a large quantity of pine timber lying upon the west branch of the Montreal river and on the Potato river, in the vicinity of said mill; that Alexander Stewart, of "Wausau, was the treasurer of said corporation; that James McCrossin was the general manager of said corporation.; that one Gilíes was the bookkeeper of said corporation, and…
1Opinion of the CourtCassoday, J.
The trial court submitted to the jury, in the form of a special verdict, forty-two several questions for determination. The difficulty of holding in the mind so many different questions is apparent. The statute requiring a special verdict to be submitted to the jury seems to limit such questions to such facts as are controverted and put in issue by the pleadings, or at most to such as might properly have been put in issue by the pleadings; that is to say, issuable facts, in contradistinction to mere evidence. Sec. 2858, -R. S. Such verdict was never designed to elicit from the jury a mere…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Heddles v. Chicago & Northwestern Railway Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1889
- McKinnon v. VollmarWisconsin Supreme Court · 1889
- Fisher v. MellenMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1870
- Eberhardt v. SangerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1881
- Bird v. KleinerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1876
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by27 opinions
- Baxter v. Chicago & Northwestern Railway Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1899
- Mauch v. City of HartfordWisconsin Supreme Court · 1901
- Wallis v. Southern Pacific Co.California Supreme Court · 1921
- Hart v. MoultonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1899
- Standard Manufacturing Co. v. SlotWisconsin Supreme Court · 1904
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.