Diefenback v. Stark
Wisconsin Supreme Court
APPEAL from the County Court of Dodge County. The case is sufficiently stated in the opinion. The defendant appealed from a judgment in favor of the plaintiff.
1Opinion of the CourtOetoit, J.
The first count of the complaint is for four months’ labor of plaintiff’s son, for which the defendant promised to pay $16 per month; and the second count is for four months’ labor of the son, which was reasonably worth $16 per month. The answer sets up a special contract by which the plaintiff’s son was to work for the defendant six months, at $16 per month, to be paid at the expiration of the six months, and avers the nonperformance of the contract by the plaintiff. It appears from the testimony of the plaintiff and the son that the contract was that the son was to work on the farm of the…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Jennings v. LyonsWisconsin Supreme Court · 1876
- Mowry v. WoodWisconsin Supreme Court · 1860
- Lantry v. ParksCourt for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors · 1827
- Bast v. ByrneWisconsin Supreme Court · 1881
- Hansell v. EricksonIllinois Supreme Court · 1862
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Manitowoc Steam Boiler Works v. Manitowoc Glue Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1903
- Hildebrand v. American Fine Art Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1901
- Foster v. SingerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1887
- United States ex rel. Farwell, Ozmun, Kirk & Co. v. Shea-Adamson Co.District Court, D. Minnesota · 1937
- Warehouse & Builders Supply Co. v. GalvinWisconsin Supreme Court · 1897
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.