Morgan v. Hammett
Wisconsin Supreme Court
APPEAL from the Circuit Court for La Fayette County. The preliminary transactions out of which this action arose are sufficiently stated in the report of the case of Morgan v. Hammett and others, 23 Wis., 30, and such statement will not be repeated here.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from the Circuit Court for La Fayette County. The preliminary transactions out of which this action arose are sufficiently stated in the report of the case of Morgan v. Hammett and others, 23 Wis., 30, and such statement will not be repeated here. While that cause was pending in this court on the motion for a rehearing thereof, and on the 2d of November, I860, George Hammett and his wife Charlotte, together with all of the other heirs-at-law of Frederick Shad-wick, deceased, joined in a conveyance to the defendant Henry 8. Magoon, of all the lands of which said Shadwick died seized and…
1Opinion of the CourtLyon, J.
I. The defendants claim that the action was prematurely brought. It is said to be founded entirely upon the judgment in the first action, which was not entered when this action was commenced. If that judgment is the sole basis of this action, the point would seem to be well taken. If so, the plaintiff is not entitled to any judgment, and we can not, on his appeal, modify the judgment in his favor. In such case he must take what the court gave him, or dismiss his action. The question is, therefore, Had the plaintiff a right of action before such judgment was entered? Ch. 123, Laws of 1860, as…
2Cited by10 opinions
- Jordan v. Estate of WarnerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1900
- Weigel v. GreenIllinois Supreme Court · 1905
- Aiken v. Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1875
- Milwaukee Loan & Finance Co. v. GrundtWisconsin Supreme Court · 1932
- Bahrs v. KottkeWisconsin Supreme Court · 1927
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.