Groat v. Palmer
Wisconsin Supreme Court
APPEAL PROM THE HACINE CIRCUIT COURT. This was an action commenced upon a promissory note, (hereinafter set forth,) by the respondent, by the name of Lodema Jones. After the commencement of the suit she intermarried with one Groat, and on application to the court, it appearing that the note was her separate property, she was allowed to prosecute her action by the name of Lodema Groat.
Read the full summary
APPEAL PROM THE HACINE CIRCUIT COURT. This was an action commenced upon a promissory note, (hereinafter set forth,) by the respondent, by the name of Lodema Jones. After the commencement of the suit she intermarried with one Groat, and on application to the court, it appearing that the note was her separate property, she was allowed to prosecute her action by the name of Lodema Groat. The complaint set forth the making of the note ; that Jones died on the first day of July, A. D., 1854, and by his will bequeathed all his personal property to the plaintiff, who was the wife of the said Jones,…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court,
Smith, J.
The only ’question arising upon the record in this case, is upon the ruling of the judge on the trial below in rejecting the evidence offered to be proved by Sproat called as a witness by his co-defendant Palmer.
Section 299 of the code of procedure provides as follows ' “ A party may be examined on behalf of his co-plaintiff or of a co-defendant, as to any matter in which he is not jointly interested or liable with such co-plaintiff or co-defendant, and as to which a separate, and not a joint judgment can be rendered.”
The proper determination of this question requires a…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Munson v. HegemanNew York Supreme Court · 1850