Pearson v. Neeves

Decided February 18, 1896

Wisconsin Supreme Court · decided 1896-02-18

H. JohNSON, Circuit Judge. This action was for the foreclosure of a mortgage by which it was covenanted, among other things, in substance, that the mortgagor, Xirchhoff, should pay annually all taxes assessed on the mortgaged premises ten days before the annual tax sale, and should keep the buildings thereon insured against loss or damage by fire, in the sum of $5,000, in some solvent, incorporated insurance company.

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently March 1903

1 state decisions

Relies on Davis v. Louk

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Reversed · Decided 1896-02-18

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

PiNNey, J.

¶1The allegations upon which the claim for the moneys paid by the plaintiff for taxes and insurance was founded were not presumptively within the knowledge of the defendants as subsequent purchasers or incumbrancers; and they might properly deny all knowledge or information in respect thereto sufficient to form a belief. Such a denial, under these circumstances, formed a material issue for trial. Davis v. Louk, 30 Wis. 308. And, as the answer was properly verified, it could not be stricken out as sham. The case of Pfist&r 'o. Wells, ante, p. I'll, upon this point, is conclusive.

¶2By the Gowrt.— The order appealed from is reversed, and the cause is remanded for further proceedings according to law.