Case ID: wis_236/html/0626-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Fairchild, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Cleveland and another, Respondents, vs. Tepaske and another, Appellants.
    
      January 6
    
    February 4, 1941.
    
    For the appellants there was a brief by Dougherty, Arnold & Kivett of Milwaukee, and oral argument by Suel 0. Arnold.
    
    For the respondents there was a brief by Bird, Smith, Okoneski & Puchner, attorneys, and Charles F. Smith of counsel, all of Wausau, and oral argument by Mr. Smith.
    
   Fairchild, J.

We find among the alleged errors nothing to warrant any interference by this court with the judgment entered below, and the case is affirmed under Rule 64, sec. 251.64, Stats.

Because of the failure of appellants to serve the printed case and brief within the time allotted by Rules 16 and 18, secs. 251.272 and 251.274, Stats., respondents are entitled to double costs under sec. 251.23 (3), Stats. An allowance of damages is not made because of the existence in this case of reasons stated in the case of Kniess v. Jefferson Construction Co., ante, p. 624, 296 N. W. 72.

By the Court. — Judgment affirmed. Respondents awarded double costs.