Case Name: Dougherty and another vs. The North Wisconsin Railway Company
Court: Wisconsin Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Wisconsin
Decision Date: 1874-06
Citations: 36 Wis. 402
Docket Number: 
Parties: Dougherty and another vs. The North Wisconsin Railway Company.
Judges: 
Reporter: Wisconsin Reports
Volume: 36
Pages: 402–404

Head Matter:
Dougherty and another vs. The North Wisconsin Railway Company.
Bill op Exceptions. (1) When necesswry in action tried before referee. (2) What this court reviews in the absence of such a bill.
1. It is the settled law of this state, that in an action tried before a referee, this court, on appeal, cannot review the referee’s finding of facts and . conclusions of law, unless the same, with the exceptions taken thereto in the circuit court, are preserved in a bill of exceptions, regularly settled and signed by the judge. 30 Wis., 157.
2. In the absence of such a bill of exceptions, in a case of that kind, this court can review only the pleadings and judgment; and if the complaint states a cause of action, and supports the judgment (in plaintiff’s favor), such judgment must be affirmed.
APPEAL from the Circuit Court for Si. Croix County.
Action for a balance alleged to be due plaintiffs for work done in grading defendant’s roadbed, under an express contract The printed case contains, 1. The pleadings. 2. A stipulation for a reference of the cause to John Comstock for trial. 3. The report of said referee of the evidence taken before him, with his findings of fact, and his conclusion of law, that plaintiffs were entitled to recover of defendant the amount demanded in the complaint. This report shows various exceptions taken by the defendant to the rulings of the referee in respect to evidence. 4. Exceptions in writing taken by the defendant to the referee’s findings and legal conclusion. 5. Notice of a motion by plaintiff’s attorney for a confirmation of the report. 6. Order of confirmation; to which is appended a statement, signed by the circuit judge, that defendant excepted to the order. 7. The judgment in plaintiff’s favor. But the case does not show that any bill of exceptions was ever settled or signed.
The defendant appealed from the judgment.
Baker & Spooner, for appellant.
L. P. Wetherby and H. A. Wilson, with Vilas & Bryant, of counsel, for respondents.

Opinion:
Lyon, J.
The action was brought to recover an unpaid balance for work and labor alleged to have been performed by the plaintiffs for the defendant. The cause was tried before a referee, who found and reported that the plaintiffs were entitled to judgment for the sum demanded in the complaint. The circuit court confirmed such report, and gave judgment in accordance therewith, and the defendant has appealed therefrom.
We find no bill of exceptions in the record. It is the settled law of this state, that, on appeal, this court cannot review the finding of facts by the referee, or his conclusions of law thereon, unless the same, and the exceptions thereto taken in the circuit court, be preserved in a bill of exceptions regularly settled and signed by the judge. Gilbank v. Stephenson, 30 Wis., 157. We Rave, therefore, nothing before us for review but the pleadings and judgment. Beyond all question the complaint states a cause of action, and the judgment is supported by the complaint. This is all we can decide on this appeal.
By the Court. — Judgment affirmed.