Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

44 Wis. 327

McDonnell v. Schricker

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided January 15, 1878

Wisconsin Supreme Court · decided 1878-01-15

<p>Practice. Sevieto of referee's rulings as to evidence; what bill of exceptions must shoto.</p> <p>In a case tried by a referee, the admission or exclusion of evidence cannot be reviewed by this court, unless objections taken before the referee are renewed before the court below on a motion to confirm, or one to set aside or modify his report, and the rulings of the court preserved in a b-ill of exceptions containing the evidence on which the court acted.</p>

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1878-01-15

How this case has been cited

Cited by 3 later decisions — most recently February 1900

3 state decisions

101878188018901900decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

LyoN, J.

¶1This is an action to recover a balance claimed by the plaintiff on open mutual accounts between the parties. It was tried before a referee, who stated the accounts and found and reported a balance in favor of the plaintiff. Notice of the filing of the report was duly given, and exceptions thereto were filed on behalf of the defendant. On motion of the plaintiff, the circuit court confirmed the report, and rendered judgment for the plaintiff for the sum so reported due him. This appeal is from that judgment, and the errors assigned are all based upon alleged erroneous rulings by the referee on objections to the admission of testimony. The record before us contains no bill of exceptions; and hence, we cannot review the findings of the referee. The objections taken before the referee should have been renewed in the circuit court on the motion to confirm the report, or on a motion to set aside or modify it; and the rulings of the court thereon should have been preserved in a bill of exceptions containing the testimony upon which the court acted. In no other way can the findings of a referee be reviewed by this court. Gilbank v. Stephenson, 30 Wis., 155.

¶2The record discloses no error, and hence the judgment of the circuit court must be affirmed.

¶3By the Court. — Judgment affirmed.

/44/wis/327 · .json · Public domain