Wilt v. Neenah Cold Storage Co.
| Decision Date | 08 January 1907 |
| Citation | 110 N.W. 177,130 Wis. 398 |
| Parties | WILT v. NEENAH COLD STORAGE CO. |
| Court | Wisconsin Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Appeal from Circuit Court, Shawano County; John Goodland, Judge.
Action by George Wilt against the Neenah Cold Storage Company. From an order for compulsory reference, plaintiff appeals. Dismissed.
Action to recover on 135 causes of action, each being on contract. All but 8 were the same in the essential features as the second, relative to the question of whether the cause, in the whole, was a proper one for a compulsory reference to hear, try and determine. The second was to recover the reasonable value of a specified amount of milk alleged to have been furnished by a person named to the defendant between specified dates, the dealings being with one A. C. Werth, agent of the defendant and duly authorized in the matter, and the claim being assigned for a valuable consideration to the plaintiff before the commencement of the action. The other causes of action were each alleged to have been likewise assigned to the plaintiff. Each of 4 of them was to recover the agreed price for a specified amount of labor performed by a person named for the defendant at the request of its agent Werth. Each of 3 were to recover for merchandise alleged to have been sold to Werth as such agent. The remaining cause of action was to recover the agreed rent for a cheese factory, the dealings being with Werth as such agent. All allegations of the complaint, except that in respect to the corporate character of the defendant were put in issue by the answer. An application was made for a compulsory reference of the whole case to hear, try and determine the issues. It was opposed by the plaintiff, affidavits being presented to the effect that the main question in controversy was as to whether Werth was the agent of and authorized to bind defendant, as alleged in the complaint, and that in the event of such issue being decided against the latter it would consent to a reference to take the accounts, if any accounting was necessary, and that eight of the causes of action did not involve any accounting whatever. The application was granted and plaintiff appealed.Eberlein & Eberlein, for appellant.
Henry D. Ryan and E. G. Jones, for respondent.
MARSHALL, J. (after stating the facts).
It is considered that the order is not appealable. The only part of the appeal statute where such orders are referred to is the first clause of subdivision 1, § 3069, Rev. St. 1898. The...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Templeton v. Milwaukee Light, Heat & Traction Co.
...Co., 59 Wis. 379, 18 N. W. 431;Larson v. S. S. L. Ry. Co., 64 Wis. 59, 24 N. W. 487; 2 Am. & Eng. Encyc. Law, 425; Wilt v. Neenah Cold Storage Co., 130 Wis. 398, 110 N. W. 177;Morris v. Brewster, 60 Wis. 229, 19 N. W. 50; 2 Ency. Pl. & Pr. 213; Chinnock v. Stevens, 23 Wis. 396;Widner v. Woo......
- State ex rel. Dithmar v. Bunnell
-
Thomas/Van Dyken Joint Venture v. Van Dyken
...Lines v. Blinco, 272 Wis. 29, 31, 74 N.W.2d 796 (1956); Kling v. Sommers, 252 Wis. 217, 31 N.W.2d 206 (1948); Wilt v. Neenah Cold Storage Co., 130 Wis. 398, 110 N.W. 177 (1907). That the question of appealability has not been raised by the parties is immaterial; such failure cannot confer j......
-
Northland Greyhound Lines v. Blinco
...judgment is appealable. If it is not, we are without jurisdiction to consider the merits of the controversy. Wilt v. Neenah Cold Storage Co., 1907, 130 Wis. 398, 110 N.W. 177; Kling v. Sommers, 1948, 252 Wis. 217, 31 N.W.2d 206. The fact that the question has not been raised is immaterial, ......