Case Name: Milwaukee Trust Company and another, Respondents, vs. Sherwin and another, Interveners, Appellants
Court: Wisconsin Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Wisconsin
Decision Date: 1904-04-19
Citations: 121 Wis. 468
Docket Number: 
Parties: Milwaukee Trust Company and another, Respondents, vs. Sherwin and another, Interveners, Appellants.
Judges: 
Reporter: Wisconsin Reports
Volume: 121
Pages: 468–471

Head Matter:
Milwaukee Trust Company and another, Respondents, vs. Sherwin and another, Interveners, Appellants.
January 14
April 19, 1904.
Appeal: Orders: Insufficient return: Corrections, when permitted.
1. On appeal from an order reciting- that it was based on affidavits of numerous persons tbe return of tbe clerk merely certified that tbe papers returned were “all tbe papers filed” in tbe action. Held, that tbis was insufficient, under sec. 3050, Stats. 1898, to give tbe supreme court jurisdiction, and tbe appeal must be dismissed.
2. While tbe supreme court has power to permit necessary corrections in tbe appellate procedure after notice of appeal duly given, although tbe record filed is not such as to give it jurisdiction to decide tbe merits, and while it will pursue a general policy of liberality in that regard, yet such corrections will be permitted only in furtherance of justice, considering tbe effect on both parties, and when tbe mistakes or omissions to be corrected are excusable.
Appeal from an order of the circuit court for Waukesha county: James J. Dick, Circuit Judge.
Dismissed.
Appeal by Sherwin and another, holders of bonds secured by the foreclosed mortgage, from an order confirming a foreclosure sale and denying appellants’ motion to order a resale.
Eor the appellants there was a brief by McCabe & Dahl-man, and oral argument by A. L. Dahlman.
Eor respondent Mariner there was a brief by Byan, Merton <& Newbury, and oral argument by E. Merton.
George P. Miller, for the MilwauJcee Trust Company.

Opinion:
The following opinion was filed February 2, 1904:
Dodge, J.
The order appealed from recites that it is based on the affidavit of Richard C. Sherwin and on affidavits of Camp, Mariner, and Yan Dyke in reply, and on "affidavit of numerous persons" as to value. The return of the clerk merely certifies that the mass of papers returned are "all the papers filed in the above-entitled action." In neither nor both of these assertions is there anything- to identify any of the papers as the ones used upon the application for the order, nor to declare that the entire bundle includes all those so used. This is necessary to our jurisdiction, under sec. 3050, Stats. 1898. In its absence the appeal must be dismissed. Glover v. Wells & M. G. Co. 93 Wis. 13, 15, 66 N. W. 799; Tenney v. Madison, 99 Wis. 539, 75 N. W. 979; Madden v. Kinney, 114 Wis. 528, 90 N. W. 449.
By the Court. — Appeal dismissed.