Cramer v. Hanaford

• Decision Date: 27 September 1881
• Citation: 53 Wis. 85,10 N.W. 15
• Parties: CRAMER AND OTHERS v. HANAFORD AND ANOTHER.
• Court: Wisconsin Supreme Court

53 Wis. 85

10 N.W. 15

CRAMER AND OTHERS

v.HANAFORD AND ANOTHER.

Supreme Court of Wisconsin.

Filed September 27, 1881.

Appeal from county court, Milwaukee county.

This is an action on a promissory note purporting to be made by the respondent, Kate D. Hanaford, and her husband, for which a money judgment is prayed. Kate D. answered, in effect, that she was, at the time of making the note, a married woman, having no separate estate; that the note was given by her husband, for his own use and benefit, and in consideration of an assignment of a certain lease and the purchase of certain property by him, taken by him nominally in her name, but without her knowledge and consent; that the note was void and inoperative for want of consideration; that she was not the assignee of the lease nor the purchaser of the property, but the same were assigned and purchased for the sole use and benefit of her husband, and that she never ratified nor confirmed the transaction in any way; that she signed the note because she was requested by her husband to sign the same as surety; and she supposed she did sign as surety merely, and that she did so without having any knowledge of the assignment or purchase being in her name, and that the parties all know that she had no interest in the transaction, and that the same was solely and exclusively for the benefit of her husband. The jury was waived, and the cause was tried by the court in May, 1879. May 6, 1880, the judge filed his findings, and on the same day judgment was entered thereon dismissing the complaint. On the same day, also, notice was given to the appellants' attorneys of the entry of such judgment. June 29, 1880, the appellants filed with the clerk of the court exceptions in writing to the findings. December 8, 1880, the appellants' attorneys served notice on the respondent's attorneys that they would apply to the judge, December 22, 1880, to have the exceptions to the findings ordered to stand as if filed within 10 days from the service of the notice of judgment, and to have the bill of exceptions settled. The bill of exceptions was settled December 22, 1880, and the judge's certificate is only to the effect that the testimony and exhibits set forth is all the testimony taken and produced at the trial; but no order is made on the application as to the filing of the exceptions, and they do not seem to be incorporated into the bill of exceptions, nor in any way referred to therein, so as to be made a part of it. Attached to the bill of exceptions is a copy of the exceptions, purporting to be filed July, 1880, with this indorsement thereon, to-wit: “Attached to bill of exceptions by order of judge, at time of settling the exceptions, at request of plaintiffs' attorneys. J. E. MANN, Co. Judge.”Murphy & Goodwin, for appellants.

S. U. Pinney and L. S. Dixon, for respondent.

CASSODAY, J.

Under section 2863, Rev. St., the judge is required to file his decision in writing, with the clerk of the court, within 20 days after the court at which the trial takes place; and it is urged by counsel that, because such findings were not filed within that time, they should...