State ex rel. La Follette v. Kohler
| Decision Date | 31 October 1930 |
| Citation | 232 N.W. 842,202 Wis. 352 |
| Parties | STATE EX REL. LA FOLLETTE ET AL. v. KOHLER. |
| Court | Wisconsin Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Appeal from Circuit Court, Sheboygan County.
Action by the State, on the relation of Phillip F. La Follette and others, against Walter J. Kohler. Judgment for defendant, and relators appeal. On motion by relators to advance cause on the calendar.--[By Editorial Staff.]
Motion to advance denied, and appeal dismissed.
See, also, 228 N. W. 895.Harold M. Wilkie, of Madison, and Walter D. Corrigan, Sr., of Milwaukee, for appellants.
Olin & Butler, of Madison, for respondent.
[1][2] Counsel for the relators have made a motion for the advancement of this cause upon the calendar so that it might be set down for argument at the December, 1930, assignment. Upon the argument of the motion it was suggested that a decision of this case after January 5, 1931, would be a decision upon purely moot questions. Counsel for both parties requested the court to determine at this time whether a decision after January 5, 1931, would become moot in order that the arduous and unnecessary labor incident to the preparation and presentation of the case might be saved. It is apparent upon a consideration of the record that this case cannot be determined and a final judgment entered until after the term of office of the defendant has expired by limitation of law, even if the motion were granted. It is held that under such circumstances the case becomes moot. Ordinarily courts act only to determine actual existing controversies and not merely to announce abstract principles of law.
While some courts have held that jurisdiction of a case may be retained for the purpose of deciding questions of law in which the state has an interest after a decision upon the merits has become moot, no such question is presented here.
In the opinion in this case when it was here upon demurrer, this court said:
[3] Whether or not an agent has authority to act for and on behalf of his principal involves merely the application of general principles of law which have been stated and illustrated in hundreds of cases in this and other c...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State ex rel. Hernandez v. McConahey
...N.W. 826, 828. See St. Pierre v. United States, 319 U.S. 41, 63 S.Ct. 910, 87 L.Ed. 1199, decided May 3, 1943; State ex rel LaFollette v. Kohler, 202 Wis. 352, 232 N.W. 842.' State v. Zisch (1943), 243 Wis. 175, 177, 9 N.W.2d 625, 627. The action referred to, in the petition for a writ of m......
-
City of Milwaukee v. Milwaukee County
...determine actual existing controversies and not merely to announce abstract principles of law. As we stated in State ex rel. La Follette v. Kohler, 202 Wis. 352, 232 N.W. 842, 'It is apparent upon a consideration of the record that this case cannot be determined and a final judgment entered......
-
Wis. Ice & Coal Co. v. Lueth
...with costs, the issue of damages and costs is still in the case, and it cannot be considered as being moot. State ex rel. LaFollette v. Kohler, 202 Wis. 352, 232 N. W. 842. For the foregoing reasons it follows that the judgment must be reversed. Judgment reversed, and cause remanded, with d......
-
Wis. Emp't Relations Bd. v. Allis-Chalmers Workers' Union, Local 248
...Corporation, 323 Ill.App. 594, 56 N.E.2d 649, 652, 653; 1 C.J. § 68, page 973; 1 C.J.S., Actions, § 17. See State ex rel. La Follette v. Kohler, 1930, 202 Wis. 352, 232 N.W. 842. Although it is a general rule that an appeal will be dismissed if the right in controversy has expired by lapse ......