Czap v. Czap
Wisconsin Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtGehl, J.
It is not claimed that the terms of the judgment vary from those of the stipulation. Nor is it denied that the stipulation was made in open court in the presence of the parties and their counsel. It was recorded in the reporter’s minutes and was transcribed and made a part of the record in this case. It is contended that the stipulation is ineffective because it was not made in compliance with sec. 269.46 (2), Stats., which provides as follows:
“(2) No agreement, stipulation, or consent, between the parties or their attorneys, in respect to the proceedings in an action or special proceeding,…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Catlin & Powell Co. v. SchuppertWisconsin Supreme Court · 1907
- Finkelstein v. Chicago & North Western Railway Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1935
- Baker Land & Title Co. v. Bayfield County Land Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1918
3Cited by5 opinions
- Burmeister v. VondrachekWisconsin Supreme Court · 1979
- Schmidt v. SchmidtWisconsin Supreme Court · 1968
- Pasternak v. PasternakWisconsin Supreme Court · 1961
- Village of Fontana-On-Geneva Lake v. HoagWisconsin Supreme Court · 1973
- Dover Elevator Co. v. Hill Mangum InvestmentsCourt of Appeals of Utah · 1988