Call v. Ballard
Wisconsin Supreme Court
APPEAL from the Circuit Court for Boole County. The case is thus stated by Mr. Justice Cassoday: “The following facts are, in effect, alleged in the complaint in this action, which is based upon an award of arbitrators and to recover the amount awarded: “ October 9, 18S2, the plaintiff commenced an action in the circuit court for Rock county to recover for work, labor, and services performed for the defendant by the plaintiff, his wife, team, and horses, and for the use of…
Read the full summary
APPEAL from the Circuit Court for Boole County. The case is thus stated by Mr. Justice Cassoday: “The following facts are, in effect, alleged in the complaint in this action, which is based upon an award of arbitrators and to recover the amount awarded: “ October 9, 18S2, the plaintiff commenced an action in the circuit court for Rock county to recover for work, labor, and services performed for the defendant by the plaintiff, his wife, team, and horses, and for the use of wagon, harnesses, tools, implements, etc., and for money, calf, hay, and. property furnished and delivered to and used by…
1Opinion of the CourtOassoday, J.
The only objection made to the complaint is that the award is void by reason of the arbitrators having failed to fully determine all the questions submitted to them. It is true that all the matters of difference between the parties, and at issue in the original action, were submitted to the arbitrators. The award does not in express terms specifically pass upon each and every issue made by the pleadings. But the recitals given indicate that they were all considered and passed upon by the arbitrators. The amount awarded was very much less than the amount claimed by the plaintiff in the…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Bancroft v. GroverWisconsin Supreme Court · 1868
- Dolph v. ClemensWisconsin Supreme Court · 1856
- Slocum v. DamonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1845
3Cited by2 opinions
- Montgomery v. American Central InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1900
- Wood v. TrelevenWisconsin Supreme Court · 1889