Mann v. Ætna Insurance
Wisconsin Supreme Court
APPEAL from tbe County Court of Mihaaukee County. Tbe pleadings in this cause, and its bistory to tbe time of trial, sufficiently appear in tbe reports of tbe decisions on two former appeals, found in 38 Wis., 107 and 114. On tbe trial, tbe plaintiffs read in evidence three bonds like those described in tbe complaint, except that tbe firm of Aldrich, Smith & Co. was not named as obligee in either of said bonds, as alleged in tbe complaint; but in one of them Wm.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from tbe County Court of Mihaaukee County. Tbe pleadings in this cause, and its bistory to tbe time of trial, sufficiently appear in tbe reports of tbe decisions on two former appeals, found in 38 Wis., 107 and 114. On tbe trial, tbe plaintiffs read in evidence three bonds like those described in tbe complaint, except that tbe firm of Aldrich, Smith & Co. was not named as obligee in either of said bonds, as alleged in tbe complaint; but in one of them Wm. Aldrich, in another Wm. Aldrich and James F. Aldrich, and in tbe third Martin B. Medbury, were so named. All of said obligees were…
1Opinion of the CourtLyon, J.
It was settled by tbis court in its decision on one of tbe former appeals (38 Wis., 114), that tbe complaint states a cause of action in favor of the plaintiffs and against tbe defendant for tbe moneys paid by tbe former on account of tbe judgment recovered by tbe defendant in tbe Milwaukee county court in 1862, against Aldricb, Smith & Co. Hence, bad all of tbe material averments of tbe complaint been proved as made, there could be no doubt of tbe plaintiffs’ right to the judgment which they recovered in tbis action.
Tbe only question to be determined is, therefore, 'whether tbe variance…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Mann v. Ætna InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1875
3Cited by1 opinion
- Owen v. UdallNebraska Supreme Court · 1894