Bonnell v. Chicago, St. Paul, Minneapolis & Omaha Railway Co.

I dissent. I hold: (1) That the order setting aside the first verdict and granting a new trial was reviewable on an appeal from the judgment rendered on the second verdict under the decisions of this court in Keller v. Gilman, 96 Wis. 445, 71 N. W. 809; Donkle v. Milem, 88 Wis. 33, 59 N. W. 586; and Becker v. Holm, 100 Wis. 281, 75 N. W. 999. The policy of the law is to discourage numerous appeals, and I see no good reason for discarding the construction placed on sec. 3070, Stats., in the cases cited.(2) The instructions given on the burden of proof on the first-trial werq correct. It was…