City of Janesville v. Janesville Water Co.

• Decision Date: 08 January 1895
• Citation: 61 N.W. 770,89 Wis. 159
• Parties: CITY OF JANESVILLE v. JANESVILLE WATER CO.
• Court: Wisconsin Supreme Court

89 Wis. 159

61 N.W. 770

CITY OF JANESVILLE

v.JANESVILLE WATER CO.

Supreme Court of Wisconsin.

Jan. 8, 1895.

Appeal from circuit court, Rock county.

Action by the city of Janesville against the Janesville Water Company to annul a franchise. From an order appointing a receiver of its property, defendant appeals. On motion for a stay of proceedings. Granted.

The appellant moves for an order suspending the order appealed from, appointing a receiver of the rents, issues, and profits of the defendant's works, and of the books, papers, and documents, who was to have full and complete charge of said works and property, and staying all proceedings under such order during the pendency of the appeal. The relief demanded in the action is that the franchise and privileges granted to the defendant by an ordinance of the city be vacated and annulled, that the actual cost of its works be ascertained and determined, with a view to a purchase of the same under an option secured to the city in the ordinance, and that the defendant company be enjoined during the pendency of the action from shutting off the water supply of the city furnished by its works, and for other and further relief, etc. But no such injunction was granted. The circuit court refused to stay the execution of the order appealed from, pending the appeal, or to fix the sum in which the defendant might give security for that purpose. In the meantime the receiver obtained possession of the defendant's works, etc., under the order appointing him.H. H. Hayden and E. M. Hyzer, for appellant.

M. G. Jeffris, for respondent.

PINNEY, J. (after stating the facts).

It is neither necessary nor proper to enter at this time upon a consideration of the merits of the defendant's appeal, further than to observe that it appears to have been taken and is prosecuted in good faith. It appears to present questions proper to be considered and decided by this court. We are not advised of the ground of the refusal of the circuit court to grant the stay sought by the defendant, on terms, further than that it is contended that to grant or refuse it was a matter entirely within the discretion of the court. This court has the inherent power, by virtue of its appellate jurisdiction, to grant the order applied for, and to restore the parties, so far as may be, to their condition in respect to the matters affected by the order at the time it was granted. This has been held in many cases, and in Northwestern Mut. Life...