Wollman v. Ruehle
Wisconsin Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the circuit court for Waukesha county: Tames J. Dick, Circuit Judge. This action in ejectment was decided' by this court, 100 Wis. 31. Thereafter a second trial was had under the statute, and judgment again rendered for plaintiff, from which defendant appeals. The facts, except as noted in the opinion, are sufficiently stated in the report of the former decision.
1Opinion of the CourtJDodge, J.
Upon the appeal from the first judgment in this case three propositions of mixed fact and law were decided: (1) That the preponderance of the evidence established the correctness of the line occupied by the fence; the proof connecting the survey then before the court with the original lines run and monuments set not being strong enough to overcome the inference or presumption of fact resulting from the location of a fence at a time when original monuments were probably apparent, and its continuance since. (2) That the clear preponderance of the evidence established the location of a fence by…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- French v. PearceSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1831
- Cary v. . WhiteNew York Court of Appeals · 1874
- Meyer v. HopeWisconsin Supreme Court · 1898
- City of Racine v. EmersonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1893
- City of Racine v. J. I. Case Plow Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1883
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by32 opinions
- Illinois Steel Co. v. BudziszWisconsin Supreme Court · 1900
- Brader v. BraderWisconsin Supreme Court · 1901
- Rennert v. ShirkIndiana Supreme Court · 1904
- Gilman v. BrownWisconsin Supreme Court · 1902
- Illinois Steel Co. v. PaczochaWisconsin Supreme Court · 1909
27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.