Chamberlain v. Dickey
Wisconsin Supreme Court
APPEAL from the Circuit Court for Racine County. Action to recover a balance of an account for services rendered and moneys expended by plaintiff in keeping certain horses, alleged to have been owned by defendant, at plaintiff’s stables in the city of New York. The complaint sets oat the items of the account, both debit and credit.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from the Circuit Court for Racine County. Action to recover a balance of an account for services rendered and moneys expended by plaintiff in keeping certain horses, alleged to have been owned by defendant, at plaintiff’s stables in the city of New York. The complaint sets oat the items of the account, both debit and credit. The answer denies generally, and counterclaims an indebtedness from plaintiff to defendant for cash paid and property converted to his own use, charging some of the same items of cash which are credited to defendant in the complaint. The evidence for plaintiff…
1Opinion of the CourtOole, J.
The only question, arising upon this record is one of fact upon tlie evidence.
It is claimed "by the counsel for the plaintiff, that the circuit court should have granted the motion for a new trial, for the reason that the verdict was entirely unsupported by the testimony. It is said that the evidence conclusively shows that the horses all the time really belonged to the defendant, and that George W. Dickey was fully authorized, as his agent, to contract the indebtedness disclosed in the plaintiff’s account. It seems to me that the weight of testimony does tend to establish •those facts; but…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Somers v. McLaughlinWisconsin Supreme Court · 1883
- Southern Flour & Grain Co. v. McGeehanWisconsin Supreme Court · 1910
- Stebbins v. KilleenWisconsin Supreme Court · 1887