Volume 43 — Wisconsin Reports

<p>APPEAL from the Circuit Court for Monroe County.</p> <p>The case is stated in the opinion. The defendant appealed from a judgment in favor of the plaintiff.</p>

This case was similar in its general character to the case of Marsh and others v. The Board of Supervisors of Claris County and another, 42 Wis., 502, except as to the proof of plaintiff’s title to the lands upon which the taxes complained of were assessed.

This action was brought before a justice of the peace, and tried by him without a jury. The cause was submitted to him at 5:30 P. M., November 5th; “ whereupon the court adjourned the case for seventy-two hours, to consider upon a rendition of judgment, at which time, five and a half o’clock in the afternoon of the 9th ihst., judgment will be rendered at my office.” This quotation is from the docket of the justice.

This action was brought to determine the construction of a will; and the questions which arose upon the will were determined by this court on a former appeal herein, reported in .40 Wis., 276. After the cause was remitted to the circuit court, plaintiff moved for judgment in accordance with the decision of this court, and for an allowance of $300 to him for counsel fees herein, in addition to taxable costs.

This was an action to restrain the defendants, the City of Fort Howard and its treasurer, from collecting certain alleged taxes for 1874 upon real estate of the plaintiff in that city. Judgment was rendered for tbe plaintiff, for tbe relief asked; and the defendant city appealed. Tbe case is sufficiently stated in tbe opinion.

Action of waste. Tbe plaintiff having foreclosed a mortgage executed to bim by tbe defendant Adolph Bahl, on a certain lot on wbicb was a blacksmith shop, and having purchased the mortgaged premises at the foreclosure sale, the mortgagor, assisted by the other defendants, removed from the shop certain articles of property, which the plaintiff claims were fixtures and passed to him on the sale.

Action to restrain the county treasurer from selling certain lands of the plaintiff, in the town of Cicero, for the unpaid taxes assessed against tbem in the year 1872, and to have such taxes adjudged illegal and void.

Action on seventeen “ town orders,” drawn on the treasurer of the defendant town, each of which is set out in full in the complaint and declared on as a separate cause of action.

Action, brought in 1876, against tbe board of supervisors of Chippewa county, the county clerk, and the city of Chippewa Falls. The common council of the defendant city ordered a street therein to be graded in front of a lot of the plaintiff; and the city clerk, without the order of the council, inserted in the next tax roll of the city a certain sum as a charge upon the lot for the cost of such grading.

Neplevin, for certain agricultural implements. The plaintiff obtained possession under tlie statute. Plaintiff claimed under a mortgage of the goods given him by one Capron, November 5, 1875, to secure Capron’s note of that date, payable in thirty days. The mortgage was duly filed; and a part of the mortgage debt remained unpaid at the commencement of the action.

Action upon contract. After issue joined, the attorneys for the respective parties appeared in court, and announced that they had agreed upon a reference of the case to John B. Bennett, Esq., to hear, try and determine the issues and report his findings thereon. It appears that the judge thereupon orally directed a reference to Mr. Bennett; but no such direction was entered in the minutes of the court, nor any written order of reference made, filed or entered of record.

The defendant Parker was constable of the city of Janesville; and the defendants Bates and Watson were sureties on bis official bond.

Action upon three promissory notes, amounting in tbe aggregate to $100, besides interest.

• This appeal was taken by several of the defendants from an order overruling their demurrer to the complaint. Plaintiff moved to dismiss the appeal upon grounds which will sufficiently appear from the opinion.

Judgment for the plaintiffs was rendered in this action June 4, 1875, and written notice thereof served on the 9th of the same month.

The defendants, who were attorneys and partners in business, brought an action for the present plaintiff against John Jung and others, to recover a sum of money alleged to be due from the latter to the plaintiff. That action was litigated through the circuit and supreme courts, and resulted in a judgment for the plaintiff. The defendants collected the judgment in December, 1872, receiving thereon $2,695.09, besides $25 costs in this court.

The complaint in this action alleges that during the whole period therein mentioned, one A. J. McCann was putting in logs for the defendant in the Chippewa river, defendant agreeing to furnish McCann supplies for that purpose.

<p>APPEAL from the Circuit Court for Eau Clavre County.</p> <p>Tbe case is stated in the opinion.</p>

Action on a policy of fire insurance issued by the defendant company on the 12th of February, 1876, insuring plaintiff’s frame dwelling house in Eau Claire, for one year, to the amount of $250. The house was destroyed by fire, October 2d in the same year, and the loss exceeded the sum for which it was insured. When it was burned, the building was vacant, and had been so nearly a month.

Action for the unlawful taking, etc., of a stock of merchandise, alleged to have been plaintiff’s property, and for damages to plaintiff’s remaining goods and to bis business by sucb taking. Defendant, as sheriff, justified under executions against the property of one F arnham, alleging that the goods belonged to Farnham. On the 7th of August, 1874, Farnham was a merchant in business at Neillsville.

Plaintiff, as administrator de bonis non of David Hyde, deceased, brought this action March 17, 1875, to recover of the county of Kenosha the several amounts paid hy himself and his intestate for fifty-nine tax certificates and sundry re-demptions from subsequent taxes. The complaint alleges that David Hyde died June 22, 1862, and that plaintiff was appointed administrator de bonis non August 11,1868.

Action to recover the rent of a farm alleged to bave been leased to defendant by plaintiffs, as executors of the last will and testament of Ceorge Derbyshire, deceased. It appeared on the trial that plaintiffs leased the farm, by parol, either to the defendant or to one Paddock. The principal question litigated on the trial was, whether defendant or Paddock was the lessee; and on that question the testimony is conflicting.

• This action was brought under the provisions of ch. 273, Laws of 1873, to recover three times the amount of an alleged excess over legal charges, exacted by the defendant company on the transportation of a quantity of lumber. The case was tried by the court, without a jury, in December, 1875, and judgment was entered on the 10th of March, 1876, in favor of the plaintiff, for the sum of $1,591.65 and costs.

Replevin. The cause was placed upon the calendar for trial, and, at the April term, an attorney of said court presented and read in open court an affidavit, stating that he had been requested so to do. No other application was made, and the person who presented the affidavit was not the attorney of record.

Tbe nature of the action and the substance of the pleadings are stated in the opinion of Mr. Justice Cole. Among other things, the plaintiff testified as follows: “Defendant is my stepfather; he married my mother about I860. I worked at home and lived in the family until I was twenty-one years old, which was July 1, 1872. About July 2, 1872, I thought of going out to work, and I told the defendant that I was intending to go out on the prairie to work.

Mary Jane Kirkendall having died in said county August 8, 1872, under age and without having been married, and her estate having been fully administered, the probate court, in April, 1876, made an order awarding the whole of her personal property, one-half of which came to her from her deceased mother, to Mary F. Kirkendall, her paternal grandmother.

Action on a promissory note. Yerdict for the plaintiff; new trial denied; and judgment rendered on the verdict; from which the defendant appealed.

Plaintiff is tlie owner of certain lots in tbe city of Fort Howard, on wliicb are located his dwelling and brewery, and whose easterly front is upon Pearl street.

County. In this action, by Helen T. Bacon against Ira P. Baeon, for a divorce, etc., the judgment of divorce further provided as “ alimony to the plaintiff, and to enable her to support, educate and properly care for the minor children,” that certain real estate of the defendant, “ together with all the right, title, interest and claim of the defendant, in and to the same,” be thereby “ transferred, passed and set over to the plaintiff, to have and to hold to her own use,…

When this cause was called in its order, November 21, 1877. there being no appearance for the respondent, the court, without motion, reversed the judgment with costs, under rule 17.

Action to recover a balance alleged to have been originally due from the defendants to the firm of Brockhaus & Bradley, on a current account between them, and by that firm assigned to the plaintiff. It appeared on the trial that Brockhaus & Bradley were indebted to the plaintiff, or to the firm of which the plaintiff was a member, and the account was assigned to the plaintiff in payment or part payment of such indebtedness.

This appeal was taken by the plaintiff from a judgment in defendant’s favor. The nature of the action, and the errors constituting the ground of decision here, are sufficiently stated in the opinion.

The following statement of the case was originally prepared by Mr. Justice Cole, as a part of his opinion herein: “The plaintiffs, as executors of H. L. Page, deceased, brought this action to recover… Held: after a full investigation, that the burden of explanation rests with the plaintiff. Simpson v. Davis, 119 Mass., 269. See, also, Wilde v. Armsby, 6 Cush., 314; Ely v. Ely, 6 Gray, 439. 2. That the statute (Tay.

In 1876 the plaintiffs were partners and merchants in the city of Milwaukee, and the defendants were partners and sugar refiners in the city of Baltimore. One Brewster, a broker, was employed by the defendants to find purchasers for their sugars in the Milwaukee market.

Circuit Court for Milwaukee County. Action to recover damages for the publication in the “ Evening Wisconsin,” of November 26, 1875, of an alleged libelous article concerning the plaintiff. The complaint states that the Evening Wisconsin is a daily newspaper published in the city of Milwaukee; that it has an extensive circulation in this state; and that the defendants are the owners, publishers and proprietors thereof.

Action to recover a commission upon a sale of real estate, wbicb plaintiffs claim to have made as brokers or agents for defendant. The case was before this court in 39 Wis., 419.

Action upon a promissory note. The note was given to the plaintiff’ for a loan of money, and was signed in the firm name, “A. Suhr & Co.,” by the partner Suhr, since deceased. It is undisputed that the plaintiff loaned the money for which the note was given, either to the firm or to Suhr.

Judgment in this cause was entered here on the 23d of October, 1877, reversing the judgment of the court below. On taxing the costs against the respondent, January 3, 1878, the clerk of this court refused to allow anything for the printed cases. On the 8th of February following, the plaintiff appealed to the court from the taxation.

Action to recover a certain sum, and to establish and enforce a lien therefor on lumber of the defendant, for tolls alleged to have accrued by reason of the running of the lumber over plaintiff’s improvements in the Wisconsin river at Grand Rapids and the Lower Rapids. The substance of the complaint, and of the answer so far as it merely sets up a defense, is stated in the opinion.

Action for damages for the conversion of two warehouse receipts and the grain covered by them. The defendant company has been engaged for many years in a general banking business in the city of Milwaukee. One Watson, a commission merchant in that city, purchased with plaintiff’s funds, for the plaintiff, and under his direction, January 2, 1876, two thousand bushels of wheat, and received therefor the receipts in question.

'APPEAL from the Circuit Court for Milwaukee County. Foreclosure of a mortgage of land, executed July 10, 1873, by the defendants, who were and are husband and wife, to secure payment of a promissory note of the same date, made by the defendant Wenzel Seliger, whereby he promised to pay one Melster or order $200 in four installments of $50 each, payable, with interest, in one, two, three and four years respectively. Plaintiff claims as assignee for a valuable consideration.

Plaintiffs presented to the board of supervisors of Milwaukee county two accounts, duly verified, for meals and lodging furnished by plaintiffs, as hotel keepers, to the jurors in certain murder trials, and the deputy sheriffs in charge of them, under the order of the municipal court, in which such trials were had.

At about six o’clock in the morning of September 6, 1875, as the plaintiff’s servant was driving the plaintiff’s cows across defendant’s railroad in the city of Milwaukee, a passing locomotive ran against one of the cows and fatally injured her. This action is to recover damages therefor. The hip of the cow was broken, and all of her ribs on one side were broken from her backbone. The plaintiff saw the cow immediately after she was injured.

The defendant board appealed from a judgment in plaintiff’s favor. Tbe case is sufficiently stated in tbe opinion. argued that tbe' sheriff bad power under tbe statute (Tay.

Plaintiff appealed from a judgment in favor of the defendant. The case is stated in the opinion. To the point that it was not necessary for the complaint to show that the agreement was in writing, appellant’s counsel cited Whiting v. Gould, 2 Wis., 552; Story’s Eq. PL, § 761; Moak’s Yan Santv. PL, 205, 255, 339, and authorities there cited.

Action for the conversion of a stock of goods. Plaintiff claimed under a mortgage of the goods given to him by one David Nichardson on the 6th of February, 1875, which was Friday, and that he took possession under the mortgage on Monday following, and retained possession until the goods were taken by defendants.

Action for the balance of an indebtedness due originally from Hugh W. Hughes (defendant’s father) to the plaintiffs. In April, 1870, Hugh W. Hughes conveyed to the defendant certain real estate and all of his personal property, in consideration whereof defendant covenanted, among other tilings, to pay all debts of the former. This covenant is contained in a bond executed by defendant to said Hugh W. Huglies.

Justice Cole, in his opinion as originally prepared: “The action is upon a policy of insurance issued by the defendant, a company organized under ch. 103, Laws of 1872, and the laws amendatory thereof.

Action to foreclose a mortgage executed by tbe defendants Hi/ram R. Smith and wife to tbe plaintiff, on certain mill property in tbe city of Osbbosh, to secure the payment of $4,000, mentioned in tbe condition of a certain bond executed by the said Ilwam to the plaintiff, and dated February S3,1870.

Action against the executors of Herman L. Page, deceased, to recover damages sustained by an alleged conversion by them of a policy of insurance upon plaintiff’s life, which had been pledged by plaintiff to Page as collateral security for a loan. The case was before this court upon a former appeal from a judgment of nonsuit, which was reversed, and a new trial ordered. See 40 Wis., 424.

The complaint alleges that plaintiff is an attorney-at-law, and that defendant is indebted to him for a balance of $2,000, on account of legal services rendered defendant “ and divers other persons, upon the retention of the defendant, on account of and as per agreement with said defendant;” that defendant made an agreement with plaintiff, whereby the former “ retained and agreed to pay plaintiff the sum of $3,000, upon condition that said plaintiff should be retained and…

Action for a conversion of a promissory note. The case was before this court upon appeal from an order overruling a demurrer to the complaint, and the judgment was affirmed. See 40 Wis., 427. The complaint alleges that the defendants, Zoehrlaut and Robert and Ferdinand Kalckhoff, executed their joint and several note to the plaintiff, Caroline Kalckhoff, for a loan of money, and afterwards wrongfully converted the same to their own use.

After the decision of this court overruling a demurrer to the complaint in this action (42 Wis., 377), the attorney general hied an answer, October 30, 1877, admitting the contract alleged in the complaint, and the refusal of the legislature to allow plaintiff’s claim upon presentation thereof, but denying all other averments of the complaint.

This was an action under the statute to charge defendant as the father of a bastard child. The only evidence for the state was that of the complaining witness, who testified that defendant hadiconnection with her on a certain day at his father’s house, no other person being present in the house, and that she became pregnant of the child in question by reason of that connection.

REPORTED from the Circuit Court for Crawford County. An information against the defendants was filed in the circuit court for Crawford county, charging them with the crime of robbery. The record in that court shows that the defendants were arraigned on the information, and pleaded not guilty. On application of the defendants, the place of trial was changed to Yernon county. The defendants were tried in the circuit court for that county, and found guilty of the crime charged.

EEPOETED from the Municipal Court of Bane County. The report of this cause, made by the judge of said court under the statute, states, in substance, that questions of law arose in respect to the proceedings therein, so important and so doubtful as in bis opinion to require the decision of this court upon them; and that, “ the defendant desiring that such questions of law be referred ” to this court, he, the said judge, therefore submits the same, and certifies the cause, so…

Action commenced in the circuit court for said county, for services rendered by the plaintiffs, Messrs.

' This action was brought against Martin Seyfried, for the price of lumber alleged to have been sold and delivered to him by the plaintiff. Martin Seyfried having died pending the suit, it was revived against Hosma Seyfried, the administratrix of his estate. The defense set up in the answer is, that the lumber in question was not the property of the plaintiff, but of Wilcox & Co.; that Wilcox & Co. delivered it to Martin Seyfried; and that the latter paid them for it.

Foreclosure of a mortgage. The complaint alleges that the plaintiff is a corporation; that, through its proper officers, it loaned the defendant Valentine Dhein $3,000, for which he executed and delivered to the plaintiff his promissory note dated July 1, 1868, for that sum, with six per cent, interest, payable in two years; that the note was drawn payable to five persons (named in the complaint) “ as the directors of the said plaintiff, or their successors in office;” that…

This case was here on a former appeal, and is reported in 35 Wis., 215, where a history of it, so far as is necessary to an understanding of the present appeal, will be found. After the cause was remitted to the circuit court, defendants moved for judgment dismissing the complaint, and plaintiffs moved that the cause be again referred for a trial of the issues.

The action was brought before a justice of the peace of Dodge county. The plaintiff recovered, and the defendant company appealed from the judgment of the justice, specifying in the notice of appeal that it appealed “ to the circuit court of Dodge county.” An undertaking to stay execution 'was given, in which it was recited that the appeal was to that court. These proceedings were had in December, 1875. The justice made return to the appeal to the circuit court.

The Berlin Woolen Mill Company was organized as a corporation under ch. 86, P. & L. Laws of 1870, which required that it should have a capital stock of… Held: directing the same to be made.” Exceptions were taken to all of these findings; but, in view of the grounds on which the cause was determined here, it is not necessary to state the evidence. The defendant Harkness had been the superintendent and general manager of the company from about the period of its organization.

Action upon a fire insurance policy, issued August 1, 1876, upon a tbree-fourtbs interest owned by tbe plaintiff Thompson in a certain hotel in tbe city of Oshkosh, in which tbe other plaintiffs were interested as mortgagees. The total insurance upon tbe property, in various companies, was $10,-000; tbe amount insured by tbe policy in suit was $1,000; and, by the terms of the several policies, each company was to bear its proportion of any loss.

Action upon a fire insurance policy issued July 25, 1876, to the plaintiff Thompson, upon a three-fourths interest owned by Mm in a certain hotel in the city of Oshkosh. The amount of insurance written in the policy was $2,000; there was other insurance upon the property in other companies, to the amount of $8,000; and each company was to pay its proportionate amount of any loss.

Action upon a fire insurance policy, issued May 26, 1874, upon plaintiff’s dwelling house in the city of Oshkosh, insuring it to the amount of $700. The building was totally destroyed by fire.

This action was brought to recover damages for the alleged enticing by the defendants of the unmarried minor daughter and servant of the plaintiff from his residence in Eubicon, Dodge county.

Action by 0. Rasmussen, for the conversion of a wagon. Complaint in the ordinary form in trover.

ENRON to tbe Circuit Court for Columbia County. This was a prosecution for selling intoxicating liquors without license. On defendant’s affidavit of the prejudice of the justice before whom the action was commenced, it was sent for trial to one Stanley, another justice, who found the defendant guilty and rendered judgment against him.

ON EXCEPTIONS from the Circuit Court for Dane County. In May, 1874, a complaint was entered in tbe municipal court of tbe city of Madison, charging the defendant with a misdemeanor in receiving, as agent of tbe Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Company at Madison, compensation for the carriage of a certain person on said company’s road from Madison to Janesville, at a greater rate than that prescribed by tbe statute. Secs. 2 and 6, cli. 273 of 1874.

Action for a perpetual injunction, restraining defendants from mining on a certain portion of a forty-acre tract of land. The relief was claimed in the complaint upon two grounds: 1. That plaintiffs had the exclusive right to mine upon said tract, under a parol lease from one Yivian, the agent of the owner, made June 24, 1873, under which they claim to have been in exclusive possession of the premises until disturbed in their possession by defendants in October, 1876. 2.

The complaint alleges as follows: “ That the said defendant Christopher Bell, on the 18th day of August, 1876, at and within the village of Platteville, in said Grant county, being then and there the keeper and owner of a saloon, or a place where spirituous, intoxicating, malt, fermented or mixed liquors or drinks are kept for sale within the corporate limits of said village, did fail and neglect to close and shut up said saloon or place so kept and owned by him; and did…

Action for a perpetual injunction restraining the defendant from building its road from a point called Phillips’ Corners, or any other point on its then existing road, over a line avoiding the plaintiff town, instead of extending it from said town toward the Wisconsin river.

Action upon a bond executed May 4, 1857, by the defendant Bell as principal, and the other defendants as sureties, upon a license being granted to Bell, as guardian, to sell real estate of his minor wards. The complaint sets out the bond' in hcee verba, and alleges that there is now due thereon to the plaintiff from the defendants the sum of $3,000 (the penalty named in the bond), for which judgment is demanded. No breach of the bond is alleged.

Action by husband and wife for injuries to their persons, alleged to have been caused by a defective highway. The evidence of the plaintiffs tended to show that at the place where the accident occurred, a ditch and water-break ran diagonally across the road, and that, upon the plaintiff husband driving his wagon into this ditch, the axle-tree was broken, the wife was thrown- from, the wagon, the horses ran away, and both plaintiffs sustained personal injuries.

Action by husband and wife for injuries to the wife alleged to have been caused by a defective street in the defendant city. The answer denies that the street was unsafe, and alleges contributory negligence. On the 22d of August, 1875, Messrs. Ternes and May, residents of the defendant city, hired a two-seated carriage from a livery stable therein for the purpose of making a visit to the house of one Hubbard, six or seven miles out of the city.

The defendants, being indebted to the plaintiffs, executed to them their promissory note for $1,005.27 and ten per cent, interest, dated June 27, 1877, and payable one day after date. The note contained a warrant of attorney in the usual form, authorizing any attorney of a court of record to confess judgment against the payees for the sum unpaid- thereon, and to release all errors which might intervene in the proceedings.

AEPEAL from the Circuit Court for Crawford County. The complaint in this action alleges that at the times therein-after mentioned, the defendant, at etc., wrongfully kept and owned a dog, accustomed to chase, worry and kill cows and other domestic animals, as defendant well knew; that, on etc., said dog wrongfully and forcibly broke and entered a certain described close of the plaintiff, and in said close did wrongfully chase, worry and kill a certain cow of the plaintiff,…

Action, commenced in a justice’s court, upon a promissory note given by the defendant to the plaintiffs for a “ combined mower and reaper.” Plaintiffs obtained a judgment in the justice’s court for the full amount of tbe note.

The defendants Eeynolds & Lefeldt were employed by the defendant M.ary E. Parker to erect, and did erect, a dwelling house for her on certain lots described in the complaint, situated in the city of Boscobel. The plaintiff performed labor .for Eeynolds & Lefeldt on such house, at a stipulated price, a balance of which remains unpaid. This action was to recover such balance of Eeynolds & Lefeldt, and to enforce a lien therefor on such building and lots.

Action against husband and wife to enforce a mechanic’s lien for the price of labor performed and materials furnished by the plaintiffs in the erection of a dwelling house on a certain lot described in the complaint. A written contract between the plaintiffs and the defendant husband for the erection of such dwelling house is set out in the complaint, and due performance by the plaintiff of such contract is therein averred.

The complaint alleged that on the 1st of October, 1873, plaintiff sold and delivered to defendant all plaintiff’s interest in the standing pine timber on a certain half-quarter section of land, for which defendant agreed to pay plaintiff $45; and that defendant cut and removed all said timber, but has refused, on demand, to pay any part of said sum.

Action commenced in justice’s court, where the plaintiff had a judgment. The cause was then taken to the circuit court by certiorari. The facts, as they finally appeared by the justice’s amended returns, were substantially these: The action was commenced by attachment, returnable July 28, 1877, at ten o’clock A. M. At the time named, the case was called by the justice, but neither party appeared.

The preliminary facts out of which this action arose were involved in a former case between the same parties, which reached this court, and is reported in 30 Wis., 338. Those facts are there sufficiently stated, and it will only be necessary here to give a brief history of the subsequent proceedings relating to the condemnation of the plaintiff’s lots.

In April, 1874, plaintiff sold a stock of goods in Ripon, Wis., to the defendant Frederick P. Hanchett; and the latter, to secure payment of part of the purchase price, gave plaintiff his three… Held: That the mortgage given to the plaintiff is in equity a lien upon all the property sold by the receiver, and that the agreement therein for the extension and renewal thereof must be considered perfornied. 2.

The complaint alleges that the parties made two contracts, in which plaintiff agreed to furnish the materials and erect for the defendant six small houses according to certain plans and specifications; that defendant agreed to pay plaintiff therefor, in the aggregate, $8,066; that plaintiff fully performed such agreement on his part; and that defendant has paid him $2,900 on the contracts, and no more. None of these averments are denied in the answer.

The plaintiff in error was tried upon an information which charged that, on a day and at a place therein named, he, “ being armed with a dangerous weapon, to wit, a knife, did feloniously, with and by means of such deadly weapon then in his hand, make an assault upon one Charles Mappes, and him the said Charles Mappes did then and there with the said deadly weapon cut, beat and ill treat, with intent to murder the said Charles Mappes, against the peace and dignity of the…

A written instrument purporting to be the last will and testament of Susan Jenldns, late of Iowa county, deceased, was presented for probate to the county court of that county, and was admitted to probate by that court. One William .Hodges, an heir-at-law of the testatrix, appealed to the circuit court from the judgment of the county court in that behalf.

APPEALS from the Circuit Court for Adams County. In October, 1874, plaintiff filed in the county clerk’s office in said county a verified statement of his claim against the county for the several amounts of illegal tax certificates issued by it upon sales of various years, from 1857 to 1863, both inclusive, and for interest on the amounts from the several dates of sale to November 15, 1874.

Action to restrain the collection of taxes levied in the year 1875 on plaintiff’s real estate in the defendant town. The property affected by the action consists of á mill and mill lot, and certain other small parcels of land. The taxes levied on the mill and mill lot are alone involved in this appeal.

Action against the hoard of supervisors and treasurer of Juneau county to restrain the sale of plaintiff’s real property in a certain town of said county, for taxes of the year 1874, and to have such taxes adjudged void.

Upon the 16th of May, 1876, judgment was entered by confession upon warrant of attorney in favor of the plaintiff, Theodore Herfurth, and against the defendants, August Herfurth and Biederstaedt, for the amount of two notes executed by defendants, and payable to plaintiff, dated December 21, 1874, both payable at the German Bank, Madison, and past due.

Action for an injury to the female plaintiff from a defective highway. A demurrer to the complaint was sustained, apparently on the ground that the cause was not brought to the circuit court on appeal from the action of the common council of the defendant city in disallowing plaintiff’s claim for damages, but by original action. Plaintiffs appealed from the order. The case is stated in the opinion. They contended that the words “ claim ” and “ demand,” in secs. 24 and 25, cb.

Action upon a promissory note given by defendant to plaintiffs, for $85 and ten per cent, interest, dated December 15, 1873, due eighteen months after date, and payable to the order of plaintiffs “ at the Singer office, Madison, ’Wis.” The note contains the following stipulation: “No credit allowed on this note unless indorsed on the bach by the payee.” The defendant in his answer admits the execution of the note, and alleges as a defense that it was fully paid and satisfied…

Action to foreclose a mortgage of real estate, for a balance of tbe mortgage debt alleged to be d ue. The mortgage covered real estate belonging to each of tbe defendants Carver and Stafford, and also a mill with tbe land appurtenant, at Needsburg, owned by those defendants jointly as partners under the firm name of J. P. Stafford & Go.

Action for the value of a cow alleged to have strayed upon defendant’s railroad at a point where the same had never been fenced, and to have been tliere hilled by a train, without fault on plaintiff’s part. Answer, a general denial, and an averment of contributory negligence.

Action commenced April 7, 1877, to recover for charges made by the defendant company against the plaintiff for transportation of freight on its road in this state, at various dates between May 11, 1874, and January 5, 1876, in excess of the rates prescribed by sec. 6, ch. 273 of 1874.