Noonan v. Orton
Wisconsin Supreme Court
The appeal in this case was from the following order: “ It appearing to the court that the aboye entitled cause is at issue by replication filed, it is therefore, on motion of J. Downer, complainant’s solicitor, ordered by the court, that either party may take testimony before the court commissioner of Milwaukee county, or in any other way provided by law, on due notice to the other party, at any time within three months from this date, and that at the expiration of that…
Read the full summary
The appeal in this case was from the following order: “ It appearing to the court that the aboye entitled cause is at issue by replication filed, it is therefore, on motion of J. Downer, complainant’s solicitor, ordered by the court, that either party may take testimony before the court commissioner of Milwaukee county, or in any other way provided by law, on due notice to the other party, at any time within three months from this date, and that at the expiration of that time the proofs be closed. “ Dated this 20th day of May, 1856. “ By the court.”
1Opinion of the Court
By the court,
Smith, J.
We are unable to perceive any sufficient ground for appeal in this case. It is certainly premature. The appeal seems to have been founded upon what is apprehended and claimed to be the constitutional right of the party to have the testimony in the cause taken at the hearing, in the same manner as in cases at law.
It may become important hereafter to consider the practical application of this constitutional provision. But upon the meager case furnished upon this appeal, being nothing more nor *61less than a copy of the order to take testimony, -without argument or brief, it…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Oatman v. BondWisconsin Supreme Court · 1862
- Hughes v. Chicago, St. Paul, Minneapolis & Omaha Railway Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1904
- Killingstad v. MeigsWisconsin Supreme Court · 1911
- Brown v. RunalsWisconsin Supreme Court · 1861