Iowa County democrat. [volume] (Mineral Point, Wis.) 1877-1938, 1891-12-18
The Supreme Court Meets and Hands
Down a Number of De.
ciSionS.
Remarks Relative to the Late Judge
Dixon Will ba Heard De.
cember goth.
Treat and HOyt Have Their Big
Judgment Against HiIes
Sustained.

would hear anything the bar desired to
offer upon the death of ex-Chief Justice L.
S. Dixon, Dec. 90. The court then pro-
ceeded to render opinions in large num-
Der of cases. Among the more important
were the following:
The case of Curt M. Treat and M. A.
Hoyt against George Hiles, from Wauke-
sha county, was an action to recover
damages for the breach by lilies of an al
legged contract to open and work certain
stone quarry at Menominee. The main
question discussed in this appeal was the
proper rule of damages. The Judgment
Of the lower court awarding the plaintiff
$4,000 damages was affirmed.
The supreme court granted tue motion
of George Raymer to bring suit against
Secretary Ct State Cunningham to prevent
his paying State Superintendent Wells
more than 81 200 per annum, the supreme
court assuming original jurisdiction, but
providing that the action be brought in
the name of the attorney general. The
latter gave his consent to TIE bringing of
the action in this manner and it will come
up on Mr.. Raymer's petition with simply
this formal change. Secretary Cunning.
ham only figures in the case nominally.
Oin and Butler will prosecute on behalf
of Mr.. Raymer.
The case of J. A. Waterman vs.. J. s.
w aterman comes from Oregon, Dane
county. The defendant, a cattle buyer,
wrote the plaintiff, J. A. Waterman, from
Chicago, saying that a certain "Charlie'
wished to go in with him and put out
sheep with farmers in the neighborhood
of Oregon to be kept and fattened, asking
J. A. Waterman to make all necessary ar
engagements with the farmers enclosing
blank contract, running from the fl Elers
to himself alone and agreeing to pay the
plaintiff $500 for his services. ]. A. Wa
terman performed his part of the contract
out J. S. Waterman failed to perform
his. J. A. Waterman sued for $500, the
value of his services, suing J. S.
Waterman alone. A demurrer was inter
posed to the complaint on the ground tina
''Charlie' should have been sued jointly
with the defendant, and that the com
plant on y tended to show contract in
negotiation and not that a contract had
eJer been really made between the
plaintiff and defendant The supreme
court held that the complaint showed that
a definite contract had been made, and
that it was unnecessary to join Charlie"
as one of the defendants, the mere men
ton of him in a letter not being suffi cient
to make him such party. The order o
the circuit court oyerru!ing the demurrer
was therefore affirmed.
The case of Frank W. Conant VS.. J. P.
Souther came from Juneau county. The
plaintiff was left an orphan when about
year old and was placed under the guardi-
anship of the defendant, Souther. The
action of the defendant in paying the en-
tire amount of pension money due the
plaintiff for the latter's support came in
question, and the judgment of the lower
court against the guardian was affirmed.
A new trial was ordered in the case of
John Hermes, administrator, ETC., vs. the
Chicago & Northwestern Railway COM
pany. This is case from Brown county,
where damages are claimed by the father
of child that was run over and killed.
The former verdict was in favor of the
company.
The case of John F. Nelson VS.. M. Nc
Donald Emily Mcdonald and James
Smith from Door county involved the
validit7 of a mortage which Mrs. Nc.
Donald was induced by her husband to
sign believing it to cover certain mill
property owned by him when in reality it
covered the family homestead. The judg-
ment OF the lower court holding the docu-
ment valid, was affirmed.
The case of A. F. Gerraghty VS.. Ash
land county involved the question of
whether the salary of the county superin-
tendent of schools, which is fixed by law
as not to exceed $500 in counties of less
than 10000 inhabitants, should be de-
term med by the last census or by other
evidence. The court below held that it
,,,,,@ Ir 4Lo oao;oI ro,ord, ,,d lbo ~
ing was affirmed.
April IL, 1890, John Kelleher was killed
at Green Bay while working for the Mil
waukee & Northern Railway company,
and his father sued for damages and was
successful in the lower court This de-
cision is affirmed, it being held that the
evidence did not show contributory negli-
gence.
the following is the complete official
record of the days proceedings:
John C. FehIanc admitted as an attor-
ney.
Morgan ct al VS.. Winnebago county.
Motion to put cause on calender denied.
Town of Blrnam wood vs.. Town OF Stock
bridge. Motion to put cause on calendar
denied
Schroer VS.. Stefan Motion to strike
out bill of exceptions and to dismiss APP
peal denied with SO costs
State ex rel Attorney General vs. Cum
secretary of state. Motion for
leave to commence suit granted.
Waterman VS. Waterman Order af-
frmed and remanded for further proceed.
inps