Juneau Bank v. McSpedon
Wisconsin Supreme Court
APPEAL from, the County Court for Milwaukee County. This was an action for the recovery of money paid by the plaintiff to the use of the defendant, at his request Answer, a general denial.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from, the County Court for Milwaukee County. This was an action for the recovery of money paid by the plaintiff to the use of the defendant, at his request Answer, a general denial. At the trial, after the plaintiff had produced evidence to sustain the issue on its part, and rested, and considerable evidence had been given on the part of the defendant, the latter offered to read in evidence the deposition of Sophia Bartlett, taken in this action, by stipulation, before a justice of the peace in this state; to which offer the plaintiff objected. The court ruled that the defendant might…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court,
Paikb, J.
We think the defendant should have been allowed to use the deposition of Mrs. Bartlett on the trial. There is nothing on the facé of the papers showing that it was taken on the part of the plaintiff. But even if there was, our conclusion would be the same. It is true the plaintiff had not offered to use it; and there are cases which have held that a party could not use a deposition taken on the part of the other, unless it was first used by the party taking it. But the opposite rule seems to us to be sustained by the weight of authority and argument. The only objection…
2Cited by7 opinions
- Morrison v. Wisconsin Odd Fellows' Mutual Life InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1884
- Hazleton v. Union Bank of ColumbusWisconsin Supreme Court · 1873
- McDonald v. SmithMichigan Supreme Court · 1905
- Sutton v. Chicago, St. Paul, Minneapolis & Omaha Railway Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1898
- Smith v. StateWisconsin Supreme Court · 1911
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.