Legal Opinion

Combs v. Peters

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided April 28, 1964Published

1Opinion of the CourtGordon, J.

“An appeal, Hinnissy, is where ye ask wan coort to show its contempt f’r another coort.”

*639Notwithstanding Mr. Dooley, we have great respect for the learned trial court but conclude that there was an abuse of discretion in refusing to order a new trial on the grounds of newly discovered evidence.

The five requirements for the granting of a new trial on the grounds of newly discovered evidence are set forth in Hoffman v. Buggs (1959), 6 Wis. (2d) 488, 491, 95 N. W. (2d) 237. See also Estate of Teasdale (1953), 264 Wis. 1, 4, 58 N. W. (2d) 404; Mickoleski v. Becker (1948), 252 Wis. 307, 311, 31 N.…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Teasdale v. TeasdaleWisconsin Supreme Court · 1953
  2. Koss v. A. Geo. Schulz Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1928
  3. Miller Saw-Trimmer Co. v. CheshireWisconsin Supreme Court · 1922
  4. Fields v. CreekWisconsin Supreme Court · 1963
  5. Belt Line Realty Co v. DickWisconsin Supreme Court · 1930

5 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