Goode v. Barr

• Decision Date: 23 December 1885
• Citation: 64 Wis. 659,26 N.W. 114
• Court: Wisconsin Supreme Court
• Parties: GOODE v. BARR, GARNISHEE, ETC.

64 Wis. 659

26 N.W. 114

GOODE

v.BARR, GARNISHEE, ETC.

Supreme Court of Wisconsin.

Filed December 23, 1885.

Appeal from circuit court, Grant county.

Carter & Cleary, for respondent.

Bushnell & Watkins, for appellant.

TAYLOR, J.

The respondent brought an action against Mary J. Wilkinson to recover a debt due upon contract, and garnished the appellant, Frank Barr. Barr answered in the garnishee action, and denied all indebtedness and liability as garnishee. The respondent took issue upon the answer. The issue in the garnishee action was tried in the circuit court by the judge without a jury. Charles Roselip and the appellant were the only witnesses called on the trial. The court found the following facts and conclusions of law: “That on or about the ______ day of ______, 1884, the defendant, Mary J. Wilkinson, was living upon and occupying the N. E. 1/4 of section No. 33, in town 3, range one (1) W., in said Grant county, claiming some right thereon; that the legal title to said lands was then in the defendant Frank Barr; that on said day said Barr sold and conveyed said land to said Roselip for the sum of five thousand dollars; two thousand dollars to be paid March 1, 1885, and the remainder thereafter at a time named, which it is not material to find or state; that said Barr, for the purpose of settling the claims of said Mary J. Wilkinson to said lands, and to obtain a peaceable surrender of possession thereof by her, directed said Roselip to pay to her a sum not exceeding $1,000 of the said purchase money, to take her receipt for such money as he might pay her, not exceeding said sum, which receipt said Barr would accept as payment made towards such purchase money; that immediately thereafter said Roselip did pay to said Mary J. Wilkinson three hundred dollars of said sum; that no part of the remaining seven hundred dollars had been paid by said Barr or said Roselip to said Mary J. Wilkinson at the time of the service of the garnishee summons in this action, or to any person for her use; and that a sum then remained unpaid more than the amount claimed or demanded in the garnishee proceedings herein.”

And as a conclusion of law the court found “that said Charles Roselip was not indebted to said Mary J. Wilkinson at the time of the service of the garnishee process in this cause, and judgment is hereby ordered discharging said Charles Roselip as such garnishee; and that said Frank Barr was indebted to said Mary J. Wilkinson, at the date of the service of said garnishee summons on him, in a sum exceeding the sum of ______ dollars; that is to say, in at least the sum of ______ dollars. And judgment is hereby ordered that said Frank Barr pay to said Charles Goode the sum of eighty-six and 8-100 dollars, the amount of the judgment recovered by said plaintiff in the principal action against said defendant Mary J. Wilkinson for damages and costs, together with the costs of the plaintiff in this garnishee proceeding.”

The appellant excepted to the findings of...