Wisconsin River Log Driving Ass'n v. D. F. Comstock Lumber Co.
Wisconsin Supreme Court
APPEAL from the Circuit Court for Lincoln County, Action to recover compensation for driving the defendant’s logs on the Wisconsin river. The facts will sufficiently appear from the opinion.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from the Circuit Court for Lincoln County, Action to recover compensation for driving the defendant’s logs on the Wisconsin river. The facts will sufficiently appear from the opinion. The defendant appeals from a judgment in favor of the plaintiff. contended, inter alia, that sec. 3337, R. S., does not apply to corporations acting under sec. 1777, but only to two or niore persons who own logs on any river which are so Intermixed that they cannot be separated for driving. A corporation derives all its powers from the incorporating act, and can exercise its faculties only in the manner…
1Opinion of the CourtCole, C. J.
There is some language in the complaint which would imply that the plaintiff was organized under sec. 1777, R. S., but no right of recovery is based upon that section. The plaintiff was organized under the general statutes for the purpose of driving and handling logs in the Wisconsin river. It does not pretend to have made any improvement in that river in aid of navigation, nor to have built any works thereon to render the driving of logs more certain and feasible. Whatever statutory right of action the plaintiff has is founded upon sec. 3337, R. S. [amended by ch. 141, Laws of 1881], which…
2Cited by7 opinions
- Merrill Railway & Lighting Co. v. City of MerrillWisconsin Supreme Court · 1903
- RCA Photophone Inc. v. HuffmanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1935
- Michaud v. MacGregorSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1895
- East Hoquiam Boom & Logging Co. v. NeesonWashington Supreme Court · 1898
- Keith v. MaguireMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1898
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.