Legal Opinion

Notbohm v. Pallange

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided December 3, 1918PublishedCited by 8 opinions

Motion to dismiss an appeal. The action was for breach of promise of marriage and was tried before a jury, which returned a special verdict deciding the issues in plaintiff’s favor May 23, 1918, and assessing her damages at six cents.

Read the full summary

Motion to dismiss an appeal. The action was for breach of promise of marriage and was tried before a jury, which returned a special verdict deciding the issues in plaintiff’s favor May 23, 1918, and assessing her damages at six cents. A motion for new trial on the minutes of the court was thereafter made by the plaintiff which was not decided by the trial judge until July 30th, when a written decision was filed to the effect that the verdict be set aside for inadequacy of the damages and that a new trial be granted. The court had not by order extended the time for the hearing and decision of…

1Per curiam

It is clear that under the provisions of sec. 2878, Stats. 1917, the constructive denial of the motion for new trial, resulting from the failure to decide the same' within sixty days after the rendition of the verdict, became an order denying the motion, of like effect as a formal order of denial. The statute, however (sec. 3069, Stats. 1917), gives no appeal from an order denying a motion for a new trial, and this court cannot give an appeal where the statute gives none.

Some suggestion was made that by reason of the subsequent formal order granting a new trial the constructive denial could…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Fourth National Bank of Philadelphia v. JohnsonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1899
  2. State ex rel. Mitchell v. JohnsonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1899
  3. Ward v. SmithWisconsin Supreme Court · 1917

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Beck v. WallmowWisconsin Supreme Court · 1938
  2. Urban v. AndersonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1940
  3. Borowicz v. HamannWisconsin Supreme Court · 1926
  4. Lingelbach v. CarriveauWisconsin Supreme Court · 1933
  5. Bankers Finance Corp. v. ChristensenWisconsin Supreme Court · 1923

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API