Hays v. Kendall
Wisconsin Supreme Court
ACTION of assumpsit, commenced by tbe defendant in error against tbe plaintiffs in error, by service of declaration and rule, under tbe statute. Tbe declaration was in the common counts, against tbe maker and indorser of tbe note, with a copy of tbe note and indorsement thereon, and served with tbe declaration.
Read the full summary
ACTION of assumpsit, commenced by tbe defendant in error against tbe plaintiffs in error, by service of declaration and rule, under tbe statute. Tbe declaration was in the common counts, against tbe maker and indorser of tbe note, with a copy of tbe note and indorsement thereon, and served with tbe declaration. Afterwards tbe defendants below, now plaintiffs in error, appeared and filed their plea of tbe general issue, and afterwards, before tbe cause was brought on for trial of tbe issue, tbe defendants below withdrew their plea, and were thereupon adjudged in default, and on motion of tbe…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court,
Cole, J.
There being no bill of exceptions in *133this case, we can only notice such alleged errors as appear upon tbe record. The counsel for the plaintiffs in error contends that the proof in the court below was defective or insufficient to warrant the finding of the court. If the objections had been properly taken and incorporated in a bill of' exceptions, we might have considered them. But now it is otherwise.
The objection taken to the record is, that it does not show that the court entered an interlocutory judgment upon the plea being withdrawn by the defendants below. We think…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Dole v. BurleighSupreme Court Of The Territory Of Dakota · 1875
- Smith v. Chicago & Northwestern Railway Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1868