Noonan v. Ilsley
Wisconsin Supreme Court
APPEAL from the Circuit Court for Milwaukee County. Action on the following due bill: “Due to Josiah A. Noo nan, three hundred dollars in Watertown Railroad stock. Milwaukee, March 22, 1856. Charles E. Ilsley.”
Read the full summary
APPEAL from the Circuit Court for Milwaukee County. Action on the following due bill: “Due to Josiah A. Noo nan, three hundred dollars in Watertown Railroad stock. Milwaukee, March 22, 1856. Charles E. Ilsley.” The complaint alleges that on the 22d of June, 1856, the plaintiff demanded of the defendant three hundred dollars in stock of the Milwaukee and Watertown Railroad company (which, it is averred, is the stock meant to be described in said due bill), which the defendant refused to ,pay, to the damage of the plaintiff $300. The answer alleged that on the 22d of March, 1856, the plaintiff…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court,
Cole, J.
As a matter of course, if the court committed any errors in its rulings or instructions, it was proper to grant a new trial. We are of the opinion that it did not adopt the correct rule of damages. The defendant below requested the court to instruct the jury that the measure of damages for failure to deliver the stock was the value of the stock at the time of such failure, and interest. The court refused to give this instruction, but told the jury that the plaintiff was entitled to recover the sum of $300, with legal interest from the time of such demand, less the nominal…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Smith v. SmithNew York Supreme Court · 1807
- Pinney v. GleasonCourt for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors · 1830
- Brooks v. HubbardSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1819
- Anderson v. EwingCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1823
- Parks v. MarshallIndiana Supreme Court · 1857
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Ingram v. RankinWisconsin Supreme Court · 1879
- Wheeler v. HartshornWisconsin Supreme Court · 1876
- Fosdick v. GreenOhio Superior Court, Cincinnati · 1871