Converse v. Ketchum
Wisconsin Supreme Court
APPEAL from tbe Circuit Court for Columbia County. The relief sought by the complainant in this action was, that an account might be taken of all crops raised upon the premises therein described during the year 1860, in order that the plaintiff’s share thereof, as administrator, might be ascertained, &c.; that a receiver might be appointed by the court to take charge of said crops until the final determination of the suit; that a just division of the same might be made…
Read the full summary
APPEAL from tbe Circuit Court for Columbia County. The relief sought by the complainant in this action was, that an account might be taken of all crops raised upon the premises therein described during the year 1860, in order that the plaintiff’s share thereof, as administrator, might be ascertained, &c.; that a receiver might be appointed by the court to take charge of said crops until the final determination of the suit; that a just division of the same might be made between the plaintiff and the defendant Ketchum; and that by the judgment of the court the plaintiff’s share thereof, as…
1Opinion of the Court
*204 By the Court,
Paine, J.
The view we have taken of the general nature of this case will preclude the necessity of examining most of the questions of fact discussed on the argument. That view is, that there is an entire failure of any ground for equitable interference.
The action was brought by the plaintiff, as administrator of the estate of his deceased son, to restrain the defendants from taking or disposing of the crops raised on the estate in the year 1860. It appears that the plaintiff was appointed administrator in the year 1856.’ The estate was leased to other parties prior to January,…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Welz v. RhodiusIndiana Supreme Court · 1882
- Erskine v. SwansonNebraska Supreme Court · 1895
- Ekern v. McGovernWisconsin Supreme Court · 1913