Olinger v. Liddle
Wisconsin Supreme Court
APPEAL from the Circuit Court for Grami County. The action was brought against the defendants, George-Liddle, Jr., and his wife, to foreclose a mortgage executed by them to the plaintiff, and resulted in a judgment of foreclosure. The defendants made no appearance. The mortgaged premises were sold pursuant to the judgment.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from the Circuit Court for Grami County. The action was brought against the defendants, George-Liddle, Jr., and his wife, to foreclose a mortgage executed by them to the plaintiff, and resulted in a judgment of foreclosure. The defendants made no appearance. The mortgaged premises were sold pursuant to the judgment. The proceeds of such sale being insufficient to pay the mortgage debt, judgment was thereafter entered against the defendant George Liddle, Jr., for such deficiency,— he being personally liable for the mortgage debt. The latter thereupon appealed to this court. The notice…
1Opinion of the CourtLyon, J.
The judgment of foreclosure and the judg- • ment for deficiency are each appealable. But both cannot be included in one appeal. Ballou v. Chicago & N. W. R'y Co., 53 Wis., 150. Here it is attempted to take one appeal from both judgments. This is fatal to the appeal. Counsel for appellant argued that the appeal is from the judgment for deficiency alone. He claims that the statement in the notice, that the appellant “ appeals from the whole and *623every part thereof,” refers only to that judgment, and that the notice is inoperative as an appeal from the foreclosure judgment because the statute…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Ballou v. Chicago & Northwestern Railway Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1881
3Cited by5 opinions
- Grand Island Savings & Loan Ass'n v. MooreNebraska Supreme Court · 1894
- State v. PrestonNevada Supreme Court · 1908
- Irvin v. SmithWisconsin Supreme Court · 1887
- Houser v. NoltingSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1899
- Pearson v. FlatenSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1923