Goldmark v. Roseneeld

Decided October 11, 1887

Wisconsin Supreme Court · decided 1887-10-11

The case sufíiciently appears in the opinion. They contended, inter alia', that it was improper to join a motion to strike out a pleading with a motion for judgment. Fellows v. Prest, etc. of Menasha, 11 Wis. 559.

Relies on Victor Sewing Machine Co. v. Heller · Thornton v. Eaton

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1887-10-11

How this case has been cited

Cited by 3 later decisions — most recently December 1939

1 federal appellate · 2 state decisions

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 →

By the Court.

¶1This is an appeal from an order for judgment dismissing the action with costs, made by the county court February 26, 1887. The order also strikes from the files an amended complaint, and dissolves two injunctional orders granted in the action by a court commissioner. Judgment was regularly entered pursuant to the order, on March 22, 1887, dismissing the plaintiff’s complaint, and for costs. This appeal was taken March 28th. It is therefore too late. No appeal lies after judgment from an interlocutory order reviewable on an appeal from the judgment. Victor S. M. Co. v. Heller, 41 Wis. 657; Thornton v. Eaton, 45 Wis. 621. This order is so reviewable. R. S. sec. 3070.

¶2The appeal must be dismissed.