Poole v. Tannis
| Decision Date | 18 December 1908 |
| Parties | POOLE v. TANNIS. |
| Court | Wisconsin Supreme Court |
Additional opinion. Former judgment vacated, and judgment of trial court affirmed.
For former opinion, see 118 N. W. 188.
It was not intended in this case to reverse the judgment of the trial court, but simply to point out that the plaintiff's lien was not a purchase-money lien, as denominated by the trial court, but an equitable lien arising from the agreement under which the money was advanced. The intention of the court, after pointing out this distinction, was to affirm the judgment, because, in the situation of the present case, there was no material difference in the legal consequences of the two liens, and hence no prejudicial error. By inadvertence, however, a mandate of reversal, instead of affirmance, was entered, and the court now, of its own motion, corrects the error and directs the entry of the judgment which was intended.
The former judgment of this court herein is in all things vacated and set aside, and the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Cargill Coal Co. v. Valentine
...and hence is invalid under the rule of Buck v. Pond, 1905, 126 Wis. 382, 105 N.W. 909; Poole v. Tannis, 1908, 137 Wis. 363, 118 N.W. 188, 118 N.W. 864, and Bast v. Sproll, 1922, 176 Wis. 371, 187 N.W. 223. It is the position of the plaintiff that the contract calls for cash payment from the......