Legal Opinion

Lancaster v. Borkowski

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided December 5, 1922PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtRosenberry, J.

The order denying plaintiff’s motion for judgment on the pleadings is not an appealable order. It does not in effect determine the action or prevent a judgment from which an appeal might be taken. Sec. 3069, Stats.

There remains for consideration the issues raised by the appeal from the order dissolving the temporary injunction. The granting of an injunction pendente lite is a matter resting in the sound judicial discretion of the trial court. Ward v. Sweeney, 106 Wis. 44, 82 N. W. 169; Walker v. *6Backus H. Co. 97 Wis. 160, 72 N. W. 230; Gimbel Bros. v. Milwaukee Boston Store, 161 Wis. 489, 154…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Hart v. MoultonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1899
  2. Gimbel Bros. v. Milwaukee Boston StoreWisconsin Supreme Court · 1915
  3. Wray-Austin Machinery Co. v. FlowerMichigan Supreme Court · 1905
  4. Ward v. SweeneyWisconsin Supreme Court · 1900
  5. Walker v. Backus Heating Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1897

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Langen v. BorkowskiWisconsin Supreme Court · 1925
  2. Schlesinger v. SchroederWisconsin Supreme Court · 1933
  3. State Ex Rel. Attorney General v. ManskeWisconsin Supreme Court · 1939
  4. Direct Service Oil Co. v. Wisconsin Ice & Coal Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1935
  5. Honoré v. VargasSupreme Court of Puerto Rico · 1925

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API