Legal Opinion

Hyslop v. Hyslop

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided March 15, 1940PublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWickhem, J.

We do not reach the merits of this controversy, nor is it necessary or expedient to- state them for the reason that the orders involved are not appealable. In her brief defendant concedes that the order denying defendant’s motion to dismiss is not a final order and not appeal- able. This being obvious, we shall not discuss the point further.

Plaintiff also contends that the order denying defendant’s motion to compel plaintiff to answer certain questions upon an adverse examination is not an appealable order, and we are satisfied that the contention is correct. So far as applicable here, sec.…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Milwaukee Corrugating Co. v. FlaggeWisconsin Supreme Court · 1920
  2. Phipps v. Wisconsin Central Railway Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1907
  3. State ex rel. Finnegan v. Lincoln Dairy Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1936
  4. Blossom v. LudingtonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1872

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. Wright v. HasleyWisconsin Supreme Court · 1979
  2. Converters Equipment Corp. v. Condes Corp.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1977
  3. State Ex Rel. Opelt v. CrispWisconsin Supreme Court · 1977
  4. Richie v. Badger State Mutual Casualty Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1963
  5. State Ex Rel. St. Mary's Hospital v. Industrial CommissionWisconsin Supreme Court · 1947

11 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