Legal Opinion

Strimple v. Parker Pen Co.

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided May 9, 1922PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJones, J.

The first question for consideration is whether the plaintiff was entitled to treble damages. It is claimed by plaintiff’s counsel that the stay granted was exactly as if an execution had not been sued out and no stipulation made, because defendant was staying without right, without *115rent, and expressly stipulating that both parties should be left with “the same legal rights and liabilities as if the action had been tried and this judgment herein stipulated had been regularly entered upon such trial in favor of plaintiff.” It is argued that “whether that judgment was stayed by an act of the…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Poposkey v. MunkwitzWisconsin Supreme Court · 1887
  2. Smith v. WunderlichIllinois Supreme Court · 1873
  3. Jones v. TaylorCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1909
  4. Wittman v. Milwaukee, Lake Shore & Western Railway Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1881
  5. Carter v. Van DornWisconsin Supreme Court · 1874

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Feiges v. Racine Dry Goods Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1939
  2. Chrome Plating Co. v. Wisconsin Electric Power Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1942
  3. Leslie Pontiac, Inc. v. NovakSupreme Court of Iowa · 1972
  4. Ullman v. Bee Hive Department StoreWisconsin Supreme Court · 1927
  5. Hauser v. FetzerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1928

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API