Challoner v. Boyington
| Decision Date | 17 October 1893 |
| Parties | CHALLONER ET AL. v. BOYINGTON ET AL. |
| Court | Wisconsin Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Appeal from circuit court, Price county; J. K. Parish, Judge.
Action by Frank Challoner and others against W. E. Boyington and others. From an order changing the place of trial, defendants appeal. Affirmed.
The other facts fully appear in the following statement by PINNEY, J.:
This action was brought in the circuit court for Price county to recover the first installment due on a contract for the sale and delivery of certain machinery, and a judgment in favor of the plaintiffs was reversed, and the cause remanded for a new trial. 53 N. W. Rep. 694. In the mean time the plaintiffs brought a second action in the same court against the defendants for another installment under the contract, and, issue having been joined, it was stipulated that the place of trial be changed to Fond du Lac county, and that the action be tried before the court without a jury, and the place of trial was changed accordingly. Soon thereafter, in this action, an order was granted to show cause, based on the affidavit of one of the plaintiffs' attorneys, and the records and files of the case, why the place of trial of this action should not also be changed to Fond du Lac county, so that it could be consolidated with the other action, and on the ground that the convenience of witnesses and the ends of justice would thereby be furthered. It appears that both plaintiffs reside at Oshkosh, Wis., and the defendant Boyington at Bloomington, Ill., and the defendant Atwell at Stevens' Point, Wis., where the defendants' attorneys reside; that the only witnesses sworn on the former trial were John Challoner, one of the plaintiffs, and V. P. Atwell, one of the defendants; that one W. C. Ruckman, a traveling agent of the plaintiffs, is a witness in their behalf. On the part of the defendants, it was shown that, in addition to the defendant Boyington, they have a witness residing at Ironwood, Mich., and one residing at Phillips, in Price county; but their names were not given, nor was it sworn that they were material witnesses. It was sworn that all defendants' witnesses, including the defendant Atwell, reside in Stevens' Point, and north of there, except the defendant Boyington; that defendants did not desire, but would oppose, a consolidation of the cases, and would claim in this action a trial by jury. The court made an order changing the place of trial to Fond du Lac county, from which the defendants appealed.Cate, Jones & Sanborn, for appellants.
Phillips & Kleist,...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Bahr v. Galonski
...test on review is whether that discretion has been abused. Hoppe v. State,74 Wis.2d 107, 110, 246 N.W.2d 122 (1976); Challoner v. Boyington, 86 Wis. 217, 56 N.W. 640 (1893). The convenience of the parties might now be served by a transfer. However, in view of the trial judge's accumulated k......
-
Bell v. Bell
...of extrinsic evidence offered. (Avila v. Meherin, 68 Cal. 478, 9 P. 428; Lynes v. Eldred, 47 Wis. 426, 2 N.W. 557; Challoner v. Boyington, 86 Wis. 217, 56 N.W. 640.) granting of a change of venue in a civil case is, to a great extent, within the discretion of the trial court; and, where it ......
-
The Robertson Lumber Company v. Jones
... ... The ... court can change the place of trial on the grounds of the ... convenience of witnesses. Challoner v. Boyington, 56 ... N.W. 640 (Wis.); Jenkins v. California Stage Co., 22 ... Cal. 538; Thompson v. Brant, 32 P. 890; Wiggins ... v. Phelps, 10 ... ...
-
Cutler v. Cutler
...was perfectly competent to determine the propriety of the same, even without affidavits. Lego v. Shaw, 38 Wis. 401, 407;Challoner v. Boyington, 86 Wis. 219, 56 N. W. 640, and cases there cited. Besides, this is essentially a case in equity. The verdict of the jury was merely in aid of the c......