Smith v. State
| Decision Date | 20 December 1968 |
| Citation | 41 Wis.2d 145,163 N.W.2d 8 |
| Parties | David C. SMITH, Plaintiff in Error, v. STATE of Wisconsin, Defendant in Error. |
| Court | Wisconsin Supreme Court |
Duane Herrick, Eau Claire, for plaintiff in error.
Bronson C. La Follette, Atty. Gen., William A. Platz and Betty R. Brown, Asst. Attys. Gen., Madison, Paul Leo Kelly, Dist. Atty., Eau Claire County, Eau Claire, for defendant in error.
Mr. Justice Connor T. Hansen having taken no part in the decision upon this writ of error to review the judgment and the other members of the court being equally divided on the question of whether the judgment should be affirmed or reversed, Mr. Chief Justice Hallows, Mr. Justice Wilkie, and Mr. Justice Heffernan being of the opinion that the judgment should be reversed or a new trial ordered, and Mr. Justice Beilfuss, Mr. Justice Hanley, and Mr. Justice Robert W. Hansen being of the opinion that the judgment should be affirmed, the judgment appealed from is affirmed under the rule.
Judgment affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Smith v. Kleynerman
...142, 133 N.W.2d 810 (1965) (on appeal).50. Foregger v. Foregger , 28 Wis.2d 505, 137 N.W.2d 409 (1965) (on appeal).51. Smith v. State , 41 Wis.2d 145, 163 N.W.2d 8 (1968) (on appeal).52. State v. White , 59 Wis.2d 354, 208 N.W.2d 321 (1973) (on appeal).53. State v. Kline , 73 Wis.2d 337, 24......
-
Digicorp, Inc. v. AMERITECH CORP.,
...filed. 2. Because this court was evenly divided, the court of appeals' decision in Douglas-Hanson was affirmed. See Smith v. State, 41 Wis. 2d 145, 163 N.W.2d 8 (1968). 3. A majority of this court, Justices Crooks, Prosser and Sykes, rejects the broad exception that the court of appeals ado......
-
Home Valu v. Pep Boys Manny
...Co., 607 N.W.2d 621 (Wis. 2000). While this evenly divided court resulted in an affirmance under Wisconsin law, id., Smith v. State, 163 N.W.2d 8 (Wis. 1968), it did not make the Wisconsin Court of Appeals' Douglas-Hanson decision binding authority of the Wisconsin Supreme Court. See Neil v......