Akerly v. Vilas
Wisconsin Supreme Court
APPEAL from the Circuit Court for Bane County. After the decision in this cause at the June term, 1866 {ante, p. 88), the plaintiff moved the court below for leave to withdraw bis replication to the separate defenses set up in the answer by way of counter-claim, numbered respectively two, three and four (ante, pp. 92-3), and to file demurrers thereto.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from the Circuit Court for Bane County. After the decision in this cause at the June term, 1866 {ante, p. 88), the plaintiff moved the court below for leave to withdraw bis replication to the separate defenses set up in the answer by way of counter-claim, numbered respectively two, three and four (ante, pp. 92-3), and to file demurrers thereto. The demurrers which he proposed to file to the third and fourth defenses were on the ground that they did not state any defense or counter-claim. To the second defense the same ground of demurrer was stated; and also “ that it appears on the…
1Opinion of the CourtDowner, J.
When this case was before us on a previous appeal, we held that the only defense properly pleaded as a counter-claim, was that for breach of the covenants in the deed of Akerly and others to Vilas; and if there could have been any objection taken to that counterclaim by reason of its being against Mrs. Lord (who is not a party to the action) and the plaintiff jointly, that the plaintiff, by replying without raising the objection, waived it. On a motion for a rehearing it was urged that the plaintiff had also waived all objection to the other counter-claims by replying to them without raising…
2Cited by13 opinions
- Wangen v. Ford Motor Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1980
- Fernandes v. Sacramento City Ry.California Supreme Court · 1877
- Harris v. KelleyWisconsin Supreme Court · 1975
- City of Longmont v. SwearingenSupreme Court of Colorado · 1927
- Houston & Texas Central Railroad v. NixonTexas Supreme Court · 1879
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.