Chudnow Const. Corp. v. Commercial Discount Corp., 256

• Citation: 60 Wis.2d 429,210 N.W.2d 721
• Decision Date: 02 October 1973
• Docket Number: No. 256,256
• Parties: CHUDNOW CONSTRUCTION CORP., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. COMMERCIAL DISCOUNT CORP., Defendant-Respondent. COMMERCIAL DISCOUNT CORP. et al., Third Party Plaintiffs-Respondents, v. Avrum M. CHUDNOW et al., Third Party Defendants-Appellants.
• Court: Wisconsin Supreme Court

Page 721

210 N.W.2d 721

60 Wis.2d 429

CHUDNOW CONSTRUCTION CORP., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. COMMERCIAL DISCOUNT CORP., Defendant-Respondent.

COMMERCIAL DISCOUNT CORP. et al., Third Party Plaintiffs-Respondents, v. Avrum M. CHUDNOW et al., Third Party Defendants-Appellants.

No. 256.

Supreme Court of Wisconsin.

Oct. 2, 1973.

Clyde E. Sheets, Frank & Hiller, Milwaukee, for appellant.

Allan Polacheck and E. H. Snyder, Milwaukee, for respondents.

PER CURIAM.

In its brief the respondent argues that the order is not appealable.

Sec. 887.30, Stats., was created by court rule effective July 1, 1971. It allows a party to serve written interrogatories upon another party, and in the event an answer is not forthcoming, to move the court in which the action is pending for an order compelling the party failing to answer the interrogatories to do so. In Hyslop v. Hyslop (1940), 234 Wis. 430, 291 N.W. 337, it was held that an order denying the defendant's motion to compel the plaintiff to answer certain questions on an adverse examination was not appealable. For the purpose of appealability of an order refusing to compel an answer, there is no difference between oral and written questions.

The appeal is dismissed with $50 costs.