Cent. Sec. Co. v. Milwaukee-Waukesha Brewing Co.

• Decision Date: 13 November 1917
• Citation: 166 Wis. 249,164 N.W. 994
• Parties: CENTRAL SECURITY CO. v. MILWAUKEE-WAUKESHA BREWING CO.
• Court: Wisconsin Supreme Court

166 Wis. 249

164 N.W. 994

CENTRAL SECURITY CO.

v.MILWAUKEE-WAUKESHA BREWING CO.

Supreme Court of Wisconsin.

Nov. 13, 1917.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Milwaukee County; John J. Gregory, Judge.

Action by the Central Security Company against the Milwaukee-Waukesha Brewing Company. From judgment for defendant, plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.

A motion in this case was made to make the complaint more definite and certain, upon the following grounds: (1) By setting forth therein the consideration, if any, for the alleged promise and agreement of the defendant referred to in the complaint. (2) By stating whether the agreement referred to in said complaint was in writing or oral, and, if in writing, by setting forth the said agreement in full, or the substance thereof. This motion was granted, and, upon the refusal of plaintiff to comply with the order, the complaint was dismissed, and judgment of dismissal entered, from which this appeal was taken.Glicksman, Gold & Corrigan, of Milwaukee (Floyd E. Jenkins, of Milwaukee, of counsel), for appellant.

Lenicheck, Boesel & Wickhem, of Milwaukee, for respondent.

PER CURIAM.

[1][2] The complaint alleged:

That the plaintiff at all times mentioned in the complaint was the owner of the premises known as 111 Fourth street; that the defendant was engaged in the business of manufacturing and selling beer; and that on or about the 28th day of February, 1916, the defendant “for valuable consideration, by it received, promised and agreed to pay towards the cost of changing the front of the premises known as 111 Fourth street, in the city of Milwaukee, a sum not exceeding $350; and that the plaintiff, relying upon such promises and agreement, did pursuant thereto cause the said front to be changed; and that the changing of the said front cost no less than $360; and that the defendant, although often requested, has refused and neglected to pay towards said cost of so changing the said front the sum of $350, but has only paid $180 on account thereof; and that there is now due and owing to this plaintiff from the said defendant by reason of the foregoing the sum of $170, together with interest as allowed by law; and that a reasonable time has elapsed since your plaintiff caused said changes to be made at the request of the said defendant, and a resonable time has elapsed since the time the said plaintiff has paid for the cost of such change of said front.”

The court is of opinion that this case is ruled by Union...