McGeehan v. Gaar, Scott & Co.
Wisconsin Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the circuit court for Brown county: S. D. Hastietos, Circuit Judge. This is an action to recover agent’s commissions upon the sale of a threshing outfit. The defendant manufactures threshing machinery at Bichmond, Indiana, and the plaintiff resides at De Pere, Brown county, Wisconsin.
Read the full summary
Appeal from a judgment of the circuit court for Brown county: S. D. Hastietos, Circuit Judge. This is an action to recover agent’s commissions upon the sale of a threshing outfit. The defendant manufactures threshing machinery at Bichmond, Indiana, and the plaintiff resides at De Pere, Brown county, Wisconsin. On the 13th day of January, 1900, the plaintiff and defendant made an agency contract, whereby the defendant appointed the plaintiff its agent for the sale of its machinery at Be Pere until Uo-vember 1, 1900, with the privilege of making sales in the vicinity of De Pere, the plaintiff…
1Opinion of the CourtWinslow, J.
There was considerable discussion, upon iSW argument, as to the effect of the fifth question and answer contained in the special verdict and its evident inconsistency with the answer to the third question of the verdict. To our minds the question is not important. The fifth question was only submitted to the jury in a certain contingency, i. e., if they had already answered the fourth question, and answered it in the affirmative. Inasmuch as it appears that they answered the fourth question in the negative, it is evident that the fifth question was never submitted to th»em by the court, and…
2Cited by6 opinions
- Goelz v. KnoblauchWisconsin Supreme Court · 1942
- Bodden v. John H. Detter Coeeee Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1935
- Cromwell v. CurtisCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1938
- J. I. Case Threshing Machine Co. v. LoomisNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1915
- Mahoney v. ThillWisconsin Supreme Court · 1942
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.