Wausau Boom Company v. Plumer
| Decision Date | 30 March 1880 |
| Citation | 5 N.W. 53,49 Wis. 118 |
| Parties | THE WAUSAU BOOM COMPANY v. PLUMER |
| Court | Wisconsin Supreme Court |
Argued March 15, 1880
APPEAL from the Circuit Court for Outagamie County.
Action to recover charges for boomage. The plaintiff offered in evidence certain depositions, to the admission of which the defendant objected, because it appeared by the certificate of the commissioner by whom the depositions were taken, that they were taken to be used in an action pending in the county court of said county, whereas this cause was pending in the circuit court; but the objection was overruled. There was a verdict for the plaintiff, the form of which is stated in the opinion, and which was received against defendant's objection. From a judgment on the verdict, defendant appealed.
Judgment affirmed.
For the appellant there was a brief by Finch & Barber, and oral argument by Mr. Barber.
For the respondent there was a brief by Silverthorn & Hurley, and oral argument by Mr. Hurley.
There are but three errors alleged by the appellant in this case first, that the verdict is excessive second, that the court erred in admitting certain depositions to be read as evidence; third, that the verdict is imperfect, and ought not to have been received.
The action was brought to recover charges for booming pine logs for the defendant, and it is alleged on his part that the jury allowed the plaintiff charges for 700,000 feet of logs which never passed through the plaintiff's booms. It appears from the record that there was some controversy on the trial as to the quantity of logs which passed through the booms of the plaintiff, and upon which the company was entitled to its charges. The plaintiff's evidence showed that the whole amount which passed into and through the booms of the plaintiff was 4,216,200 feet, and the jury so found. On the other side, there was the evidence of the plaintiff that the amount was 700,000 feet less. There was certainly some evidence to support the verdict upon the question of quantity, and that verdict is conclusive, unless the evidence upon the other side so greatly preponderated as to induce this court to believe the jury were perverse in finding against such evidence. In this case it does not appear that there was any great preponderance of evidence either way, and the verdict must stand.
The objections to the introduction of the depositions came too late. The objection was simply technical, and if it had been taken before the trial commenced it could have been obviated by an amendment of the certificate of the officer before whom the same were taken. See section 4091, R. S. 1878.
It is urged that the verdict of the jury should not have been received and entered in the form in which the jury returned it. The verdict found by the jury and received by the court was as follows: "We, the jury in the above entitled cause, find for the plaintiff, and assess its damages at $ 2,108.10, amount to be paid for boomage in the following manner, viz.: $ 527.02 to be paid after the decision of the award suit; $ 500, amount paid by defendant 31st of July, 1876; leaving $ 1,081.75 due and payable on the 17th of October, 1876; $ 156.82, amount of interest for two years and twenty-six days...
To continue reading
Request your trial