Fullerton Lumber Co. v. Korth

Two questions are raised by this appeal. As set forth by the trial court judge in his decision, they are:(1) Was the son-in-law, Adolph Weinkauf, properly an agent of Herman Korth for the purpose of being served with the notice of lien, pursuant to sec. 289.02 (1), Stats.?(2) Was the Fullerton Lumber Company entitled to amend its complaint to conform to the proof at the close of its case and to have judgment on the basis of unjust enrichment?

The trial court judge answered both questions in the negative, and we find that he did so correctly.

As to the relationship existing between Herman and…