Case Name: Ackerman vs. Horicon Iron Man. Co.
Court: Wisconsin Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Wisconsin
Decision Date: 1862-06
Citations: 16 Wis. 155
Docket Number: 
Parties: Ackerman vs. Horicon Iron Man. Co.
Judges: 
Reporter: Wisconsin Reports
Volume: 16
Pages: 155–156

Head Matter:
Ackerman vs. Horicon Iron Man. Co.
Where an order has been made overruling a demurrer to a complaint and granting the defendant leave to answer it within a specified time, and he fails to answer within such time, but after its expiration, obtains and serves an order staying all further proceedings in the action pending an appeal from the order overruling the demurrer; it is irregular for the plaintiff to enter judgment for want of an answer while such order staying proceedings is in force, though he might properly have done so before it was granted and served.
APPEAL from the Circuit Court for Dodge County.
The facts are sufficiently stated in the opinion of the court.
C. Billinghurst and A. J. Rising, for appellant.
J. M. Gillelt, for respondent.

Opinion:
By the Court,
Paine, J.
The defendant demurred to the complaint, and the demurrer was overruled, with leave to answer within twenty days. The defendant appealed from the order overruling the demurrer, but did not obtain any order staying proceedings until after the expiration of the time given to answer. After the expiration of that time, however, such an order was duly obtained and served, before any judgment was- entered by the plaintiff. Still, the plaintiff moved for judgment and obtained it while the order staying proceedings was in full force. This was irregular. The fact that the plaintiff was in a position to enter a judgment before proceedings were stayed, does not authorize him to enter it afterwards. If a party neglects to move as soon as be might, be does it at the risk of having bis proceedings stopped exactly in the condition in which be leaves them. He cannot go on after proceedings are stayed, because be might have done so before. Suppose a plaintiff was in a position to issue execution, but bad not done so. If bis proceedings are then stayed by a proper order, could be still go on and issue bis execution because be might have done it before? Clearly not. And it is just as clear that he could not proceed to enter a judgment. He must get rid of the order staying proceedings before be can go any farther.
The judgment is reversed, with costs, and the cause remanded for further proceedings.