Seaman v. Burnham
Wisconsin Supreme Court
APPEAL from the County Court of MilwauJsee County. The case is thus stated by Mr. Justice Oassoday : “ This is an action to recover $400 for 2,000 loads of sand, at and for an agreed price of twenty cents a load, alleged to have been sold and delivered by the plaintiff, to the defendant.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from the County Court of MilwauJsee County. The case is thus stated by Mr. Justice Oassoday : “ This is an action to recover $400 for 2,000 loads of sand, at and for an agreed price of twenty cents a load, alleged to have been sold and delivered by the plaintiff, to the defendant. In addition to denials, the answer alleged, in effect, that the sand was in fact sold.by the plaintiff to Kirkham, and thereafter, at the plaintiff’s request,.the defendant promised and agreed to pay the plaintiff at the rate of twenty cents per load for all sand so sold and delivered to Kirk-ham; that he…
1Opinion of the CourtCassoday, J.
The reasons which operated upon the mind of the trial judge in setting aside the verdict and granting a new trial are not disclosed in the record. It does appear, however, that the court made the order after “ being sufficiently advised.” Counsel for .the appellant says the jury’s “.verdict was set aside on the ground (as we suppose) that the verdict was against the weight of evidence.” There is no claim that in so doing he acted upon any mistaken notion of the law applicable to any question in the case. Such being the record, the only question before us for consideration is whether there was…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Jones v. Chicago & Northwestern Railway Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1880
3Cited by6 opinions
- Schillinger v. Town of VeronaWisconsin Supreme Court · 1893
- Mullen v. ReinigWisconsin Supreme Court · 1887
- Kayser v. HartnettWisconsin Supreme Court · 1886
- Evans v. RugeeWisconsin Supreme Court · 1885
- McCann v. UllmanWisconsin Supreme Court · 1901
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.