Bulger v. Woods
Wisconsin Supreme Court
ERROR to the County Court for Iowa County. Assumpsit brought by Woods, Jennings and Dunston against Bulger, Daley & Delaney. The first count of the declaration was upon a special contract in substance as stated in the opinion of the court, and to this were added the common counts in indebitatus assumpsit. The defendants pleaded the general issue to the common counts and demurred to the special count.
Read the full summary
ERROR to the County Court for Iowa County. Assumpsit brought by Woods, Jennings and Dunston against Bulger, Daley & Delaney. The first count of the declaration was upon a special contract in substance as stated in the opinion of the court, and to this were added the common counts in indebitatus assumpsit. The defendants pleaded the general issue to the common counts and demurred to the special count. Their demurrer was overruled, and as to this count, the defendants stood on the demurrer. At the trial of the issue on the common counts, the evidence tended to show that the defendants had…
1Opinion of the CourtENowxtoN, J.
This was an action of assumpsit brought by the defendants in error against the plaintiffs in error in the county court of Iowa county.
The cause of action was based upon a contract alleged to have been made between the parties whereby the defendants below were to work a certain range of mineral, and of the mineral raised the plaintiffs were to have a fractional proportion, the defendants a part and the owner of the ground (not a party to the record) a portion. The evidence adduced upon the trial was more or less applicable to this state of the case. The defendants demurred to the first count…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Sullivan v. SherryWisconsin Supreme Court · 1901
- Tietz v. TietzWisconsin Supreme Court · 1895