Emery v. Fugina
Wisconsin Supreme Court
APPEAL from the Circuit Court for Trempealeau County. This is an action of trover to recover the value of 150 bushels of winter wheat, of the alleged value of $150. The taking and conversion of the wheat by the defendants, and the value thereof, is not controverted. Each party claims to own the wheat, and this is the only controversy in the case.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from the Circuit Court for Trempealeau County. This is an action of trover to recover the value of 150 bushels of winter wheat, of the alleged value of $150. The taking and conversion of the wheat by the defendants, and the value thereof, is not controverted. Each party claims to own the wheat, and this is the only controversy in the case. The wheat was raised on the farm of one Paul Pam-pauch, and was harvested in July, 1881. On April 19 of that year, Pampauch, who was indebted to the plaintiff’s intestate, executed to her an instrument in writing of that date, purporting to be a…
1Opinion of the CourtLyon, J.
In many respects this case is similar to that of Lamson v. Moffat, 61 Wis. 153, on the authority of which, doubtless, the question of the intention of the parties in executing the instrument of April 19, 1881, was submitted to the jury. The evidence is sufficient to support the special finding that such instrument, under which the plaintiff claims title to the wheat, is what on its face it purports to be, a lease, and hence not a mere security for a debt. Being a lease, there can be no doubt, we think, that the crop of wheat growing upon the leased premises when the instrument was executed,…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Lamson v. MoffatWisconsin Supreme Court · 1884
- Hisey v. TroutmanIndiana Supreme Court · 1882
3Cited by3 opinions
- Brown v. JonesOregon Supreme Court · 1929
- City Council of Greenville v. WhiteMississippi Supreme Court · 1943
- Frishkorn v. OgdenAlabama Court of Appeals · 1918