Geis v. McKenna
Wisconsin Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtBrown, J.
The case comes before us without a bill of exceptions. The trial court’s findings of fact stand, therefore, as verities. Davis v. Davis (1951), 259 Wis. 1, 47 N. W. (2d) 338. In the absence of a bill of exceptions, the supreme court is limited to ascertaining whether judgment is sustained by the pleadings and by the findings of fact. Id., State ex rel. Ignasiak v. Franklin (1954), 268 Wis. 295, 67 N. W. (2d) 308; Rode v. Sealtite Insulation Mfg. Corp. (1958), 3 Wis. (2d) 286, 88 N. W. (2d) 345.
Appellants do not contend that the judgment does not come within the issues framed by the pleadings…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Davis v. DavisWisconsin Supreme Court · 1951
- Elbinger v. Capitol & Teutonia Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1932
- Rode v. Sealtite Insulation Manufacturing Corp.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1958
- State Ex Rel. Ignasiak v. Town of FranklinWisconsin Supreme Court · 1954
3Cited by3 opinions
- Nichols v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1961
- Denny v. StateWisconsin Supreme Court · 1970
- Schoenfeld v. Silver Moon Springs, Inc.District Court, E.D. Wisconsin · 1971