Hessel v. Johnson
Wisconsin Supreme Court
APPEAL from the Circuit Court for Door County. Action upon a judgment, alleged to have been recovered b}'' the plaintiffs against the defendant in Delta county, Michigan. The answer, besides defensive matters, contains two counterclaims, the substance of the second of which is stated in the opinion. The plaintiffs demurred to the second counterclaim on the ground, among others, that it does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from the Circuit Court for Door County. Action upon a judgment, alleged to have been recovered b}'' the plaintiffs against the defendant in Delta county, Michigan. The answer, besides defensive matters, contains two counterclaims, the substance of the second of which is stated in the opinion. The plaintiffs demurred to the second counterclaim on the ground, among others, that it does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. The demurrer was sustained, and the defendant appealed. The counterclaim was defective in failing to allege (1) that the 'ties and posts were…
1Opinion of the CourtCole, C. J.
We think the demurrer to the second counterclaim set up in the answer should have been overruled. It is said it was defective because it failed to state that the ’defendant paid the purchase price of the lumber or that he sustained damage by reason of the breach of warranty as to its quality. The counterclaim states, in substance, that the plaintiffs, at the time named, sold to the defendant 10,960 cedar posts at five and one-half cents per post, and 2,070 tamarack ties at twelve cents per tie; that, for the purpose of inducing the defendant to make such purchase, the plaintiffs did then and…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Rossiter v. SchultzWisconsin Supreme Court · 1885
3Cited by1 opinion
- Kinney v. EckenbergerOregon Supreme Court · 1915