Robbins v. Kountz
Wisconsin Supreme Court
APPEAL from the Circuit Court for Claris County. This appeal was taken by the plaintiff from an order of the court. The motion papers disclose the following facts: The .action is for a malicious trespass ujjon land and for cutting and removing therefrom trees, logs and timber.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from the Circuit Court for Claris County. This appeal was taken by the plaintiff from an order of the court. The motion papers disclose the following facts: The .action is for a malicious trespass ujjon land and for cutting and removing therefrom trees, logs and timber. The original complaint described the locus in quo as the east half of a specified quarter section of land, and demanded judgment for $500. The defendant answered, first, a general denial; and secondly, that at the time of the alleged trespass he was and ever since has been, the owner in fee of the land described in the…
1Opinion of the CourtLyoN, J.
I. The order denying the motion to set aside the judgment for fraud is not a bar to a motion for relief under sec. 38, ch. 125, E. S. 1858. Th^e motions are of a different nature, and are necessarily based upon entirely different facts. The first was founded upon an alleged right; the latter was an *561appeal to tbe court to exercise a discretionary power in favor of tbe moving party. No doubt tbe denial of a motion to vacate a judgment for specified irregularities is a bar to another motion to vacate it for tbe same or some other irregularities, unless the first motion is denied without…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Weber v. TschetterSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1890
- Bloor v. SmithWisconsin Supreme Court · 1901
- Boutin v. CatlinWisconsin Supreme Court · 1899
- Wawrzyniakowski v. Hoffman & Billings Manufacturing Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1909
- Ketchum v. Chicago, St. Paul, Minneapolis & Omaha Railway Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1912