¶1(dissenting in part). When this case was here originally I did not agree with the majority of the court and entered my dissent. Smith v. Lederer, 157 Wis. 479, 146 N. W. 888. Afterwards on motion for rehearing and *666to change the mandate I was of opinion that the rehearing should be granted, or at least the mandate changed. The court refused the rehearing, also refused to change the mandate. While I think the case was decided wrong originally and also that the motion to amend the mandate should have been granted so as 'to afford the appellant an opportunity to move the court below for a new trial, I do not see how the court below could' have done differently than, to enter judgment according to the mandate.
158 Wis. 662
Smith v. DeWolf
Decided November 17, 1914
Wisconsin Supreme Court · decided 1914-11-17
J. Tüeneb, Circuit Judge. The action is to recover damages for personal injuries due to an elevator accident. The case was presented to this court on a former hearing on the appeal of a codefendant, Lederer, and is reported as Smith v. Lederer, 157 Wis. 479, 146 1ST. W. 888.
Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently April 1933
1 state decisions
Relies on Smith v. Lederer
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Affirmed · Decided 1914-11-17
View the full empirical analysis of this case →