Case Name: Beach vs. Beckwith
Court: Wisconsin Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Wisconsin
Decision Date: 1860-11-19
Citations: 13 Wis. 21
Docket Number: 
Parties: Beach vs. Beckwith.
Judges: 
Reporter: Wisconsin Reports
Volume: 13
Pages: 21–22

Head Matter:
Beach vs. Beckwith.
Where the parties to an action in a circuit court stipulate that it may be tried before the judge at chambers, and the finding be filed and judgment entered with the same effect as though the trial were had before the court without a jury, a judgment entered in pursuance of such stipulation must be regarded as though actually entered upon a trial before the court.
APPEAL from tbe Circuit Court for Waupacca County.
Action to recover for work done.
Tbe case is stated sufficiently in tbe opinion of tbe court.
Wheeler & Kimball, for appellant.
W. O. and H. Q-. Webb, for respondent.
November 19.

Opinion:
By the Court,
Paihe, J.
Tbis case was tried before tbe judge at chambers by a stipulation that it might be so tried, and tbe finding filed, judgment entered and exceptions taken in tbe same manner and with tbe same effect as though tbe trial bad been before tbe court without a jury. Tbe question is now raised in tbe appellant's brief, whether tbis practice can be sustained, though no motion has been, made or exception taken which presents it directly to tbe court. Still, perhaps if tbe objection is good, it goes to tbe jurisdiction of tbis court, as involving tbe question whether there is really any judgment from which tbe appeal could be taken. And if we should be of tbe opinion that there was not, it might be our duty to dismiss tbe appeal. But we aré satisfied that tbe objection is not valid, but that a judgment entered in pursuance of such a stipulation, by parties to a suit actually pending in court, is to be regarded as though it had been actually entered on a trial before the court. The objection coming from one of the parties to such a stipulation, is certainly entitled to no favor. And nothing less than the absolute invalidity of the proceeding should furnish it any sanction. But there seems to be no valid reason why such a practice should not be pursued. It is not an attempt to confer jurisdiction by consent, upon a tribunal that has it not, but is simply the regulation of the mode of trial, by the parties, for their own convenience, and of the manner of enter ing tbe judgment in a court wbicb bas jurisdiction both of the parties and tbe subject matter. See WalJcer ads. Bogan, 1 "Wis., 623, et seq., as to the effect of such a stipulation.
The only remaining questions are merely of fact, dejcend-ing on the weight of the evidence. We do not deem it necessary to comment on it in detail, and shall do no more than to say that, in our opinion, the weight of evidence is decidedly in favor of the finding of the judge'below.
The judgment is affirmed, with costs.