Vilas County news. [volume] (Eagle River, Vilas County, Wis.) 1896-1927, 1900-11-05
SUIT DECIDED INVOLVING GEN.
ERAL CHARTER LAW.
SUPREME COURT RULING
Important Decision Concerning Consti-
tutionaI Provisions Governing City
Charters - Tribunal ReVerses
Twelve Cases and Affirms Nine
Findings as Handed Down.
Madison. Oct. 81.

|
circuit court for La Crosse county af-
frming the proceedings of the common
council of the city of La Crosse in
adopting a part of the general charter
laws as an amendment to and in Ecu
of some Of the provisions of it's special
charter relating to the improvement of
streets. The relator contended that
the proceedings were not in accord
ance with various constitutional provi-
sions pertaining to city government,
and that the common council had no
authority to adopt a part of q sub
chapter of the general charter law, but
must either adopt it all or nothing.
The respondent contended that the
part adopted be the common council
furnished a complete scheme for the
| Improvement of streets and was a per-
feet piece of legislation and that under
the rules laid down in the recent case
of Adams versus Beloit complied with
the constitutional provisions govern
ing city charters.
The supreme court reversed twelve
cases and affirmed nine. Other deci-
sions rendered are:
BY Chief Justice Cassoday.
Maldauer VS.. Beurhaus. Both or
ders reversed and cause remanded
with directions to override demurrer
and for further proceedings according
to law.
| Weille VS.. Reinhard. Judgment re-
versed and cause remanded for new
trial as to all matters subsequent to
the settlement of April, 1885, and not
herein determined.
Connell VS.. Stark. Judgment af-
| frmed.
BY Justice WinsloW.
! Holdridge VS.. Mendenhall. Judg-
ment reversed and action remanded
for new trial. Chief justice took no
part.
Wiley VS.. Rutherford. Judgment re-
versed and action remanded for new
| trial.
Evison VS.. Hallock. Order affirmed.
In re will of w. H. Stickney. Fox
vs. Martin. Those parts of judgment
appealed from reversed on both ap-
peals, and action remanded for fur
ther proceedings according to law.
Dowagiac Mfg. Co. VS.. Schroeder
Judgment affirmed.
BY Justice Marshall.
State ex rel Atkinson VS.. Melon
AID Judgment affirmed.
Wyss VS.. Grunert. Judgment re-
versed as to SPEECH and Marty and af-
firmed as to Grunert. Costs in this
court to go against respondent for
clerks fees and printing, and cause
remanded with directions to modify
the judgment in the circuit court ac-
cordingly, dismissing the case as to
SPEECH and Marty with costs.
Ryan VS.. Phillip Appeal dismissed.
Gibson VS. Gibson. Judgment af-
/ firmed.
Murphy VS.. State. Judgment af-
firmed.
BY Justice Bardeen.
State ex rel. Taylor VS.. City of SUI
perior. Judgment affirmed.
Fillingham VS.. Nichols. Judgment
reversed and cause remanded with di-
rections to dismiss the action.
State ex rel Fuller VS.. Waukesha
circuit court.
In re estate of John Daley. Leitga-
bel VS.. Belt. Judgment affirmed.
BY Justice Dodge.
McCord VS.. Hill. Order reversed
and cause remanded with directions to
oyerrule demurrer. Chief justice and
! NEorobo11 +ooIx M nc
Twohy Mercantile Co. VS.. Estate of
VIM. A. Mcdonald. Judgment reversed
and cause remanded for new trial.
Musbach vs. Wisconsin Chair Co.
Judgment reversed and cause remand
ed for new trial.
Lyle VS.. Mccormick Harvesting Ma
chine Co. Judgment affirmed.
! Other proceedings We're:
Scott ct al. vs. Haupert ct al, John
son VS.. Pugh., and Some Lumber Co.
VS.. Lincoln County ct al. Continued
Mass VS.. City of Eau Claire. Appeal
dismissed as per stipulation.
State ex rel. w. G. Taylor Co. VS.. FL
lott, Judge, etc. Petition filed and
motion by relator, by F. H. Reming-
ton, for an alternative writ Of man.
| damus.
| Roosevelt VS.. Land and River Co.
Argued by A. L. Sanborn for appellant
and by M. G. Sloan for respondent.
Edwards VS.. Mellen Lumber Co. ct
al Argued by Ben S. Smith for appel
liant and by Geo. F. Merrill for re-.
| spondents.
Emerson ct al VS.. Schwindt ct al.
| Argued by H. G.. Peters for appellants
and by James O'Leary for respond
entS.
| State ex rel. Funke VS.. Bergeson ct
al Argued by H. c. Peters for re-
spondents and submitted for appellant
on case and brief.
Bank of Rice Lake VS.. Chippewa
Valley & Menomonie Ry. Co. Appeal
dismissed for want of prosecution.
Miles VS.. Mutual Reserve Fund Life
| Association. Argued by Geo. F. Mer-