Hafemann v. Seymer
Wisconsin Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtEschweiler, J.
Plaintiff contends that, inasmuch as one body of facts is found common to all of the pleadings, there is no such substantial change in the second amended complaint from the cause or causes of action asserted and relied upon by the plaintiff in the original and first amended complaint, or such a departure from those prior pleadings, as 'will properly sustain the demurrer under the statute of limitations as to four of the several causes of action set forth in such second amended complaint, presented more than four years after the death of Mrs. Hafemann.
It is, however, as firmly settled as a…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- New York Central & Hudson River Railroad v. KinneySupreme Court of the United States · 1922
- Seaboard Air Line Railway v. RennSupreme Court of the United States · 1916
- Astin v. Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1910
- Bentson v. BrownWisconsin Supreme Court · 1925
- Watkins v. SimsSupreme Court of Florida · 1921
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Kuehn v. KuehnWisconsin Supreme Court · 1960
- State v. WhatleyWisconsin Supreme Court · 1933
- Bursack v. DavisWisconsin Supreme Court · 1929
- Gordon v. Horlamus Industries, Inc.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1986
- Bentson Administrator v. BrownWisconsin Supreme Court · 1926
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.