Krudwig v. Koepke
Wisconsin Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtRosenberry, C. J.
The defendant Kaehne contends that the court erred in permitting plaintiff to file an amended complaint and in overruling the defendant Kaehne’s plea that the causes of action set out in the plaintiff’s complaint were barred by the statute of limitations. In the complaint upon which the first action was tried it was alleged:
“That A1 Koepke and Anton Kaehne assaulted and violently beat the plaintiff.”
Recovery was sought for the damages caused by the assault. While the complaint in the first case implied that the defendant Kaehne personally took part in the assault and *3battery, the evidence…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- State v. DiamondNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1921
- Piluso v. SpencerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1918
- Hilmes v. StroebelWisconsin Supreme Court · 1883
- Duss v. FriessWisconsin Supreme Court · 1937
- Wulfers v. E. W. Clark Motor Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1922
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Toone v. AdamsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1964
- Duffy v. ScottWisconsin Supreme Court · 1940
- Hawkins v. WilsonSupreme Court of Kansas · 1953
- Fox v. KaminskyWisconsin Supreme Court · 1942
- Nygaard v. Wadhams Oil Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1939
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.