Maurer v. Stiner
Wisconsin Supreme Court
APPEAL from the Circuit Court for Waukesha County. The facts are stated in the opinion. . to the point that the statute does not contemplate the granting of a new trial as a matter of right in actions other than ejectment, cited Shumwa/y v. Shumwa/y, 42 • N. Y. 143; Sedgw. & W. Tr. Tit.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from the Circuit Court for Waukesha County. The facts are stated in the opinion. . to the point that the statute does not contemplate the granting of a new trial as a matter of right in actions other than ejectment, cited Shumwa/y v. Shumwa/y, 42 • N. Y. 143; Sedgw. & W. Tr. Tit. Land, secs. 484, 595, 608-9; Knight v. Valentine, 35 Minn. 367. They cited Schmitt v. Schmitt, 32 Minn. 130; Physio-Medical College v. Wilkinson, 89 Ind. 23; Campbell v. Hunt, 104 id. 210; Bucher v. Carroll, 19 Hun, 618; Cona/n v. Eollis, 61 Wis. 224.
1Opinion of the CourtIJiNNEY, J.
The plaintiff claimed an easement or right of private way over a certain strip of defendant’s land, two rods in width, on several.grounds, namely: (1) That it had been laid out by the supervisors as a private road; (2) that his ancestor and grantor purchased and paid $50 for it to the predecessor in title of the defendant; (3) twenty years’ adverse user; and (4) ten years’ adverse user and claim of right under an order of the supervisors of the town laying it out as a private way or road,— and in his complaint he charged the defendant, in substance, with interrupting and disturbing him in its…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Child v. . ChappellNew York Court of Appeals · 1853
- Strong v. . City of BrooklynNew York Court of Appeals · 1876
- City of Racine v. CrotsenbergWisconsin Supreme Court · 1884
- Shumway v. . ShumwayNew York Court of Appeals · 1870
3Cited by4 opinions
- Le Blond v. Town of PeshtigoWisconsin Supreme Court · 1909
- Buckner v. HutchingsWisconsin Supreme Court · 1892
- Cobian v. TiysicWisconsin Supreme Court · 1923
- Newland v. MorrisWisconsin Supreme Court · 1902