Case Name: F. Dohmen Company (Limited), Respondent, vs. Manufacturers' & Builders' Fire Insurance Company, Appellant
Court: Wisconsin Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Wisconsin
Decision Date: 1897-04-30
Citations: 96 Wis. 57
Docket Number: 
Parties: F. Dohmen Company (Limited), Respondent, vs. Manufacturers’ & Builders’ Fire Insurance Company, Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: Wisconsin Reports
Volume: 96
Pages: 57–59

Head Matter:
F. Dohmen Company (Limited), Respondent, vs. Manufacturers’ & Builders’ Fire Insurance Company, Appellant.
March 19
April 30, 1897.
F. Dohmen Co. v. Niagara F. Ins. Co., ante, p. 38, followed.
Appeal from a judgment of the superior court of Milwaukee county: E. N. Austin, Judge. .
Reversed.
This is an action to recover on a policy of fire insurance covering the same property mentioned in the case of F. Doh-men Go. v. Niagara Fire Ins. Co., ante, p. 38. The action is on one of the policies mentioned in' such previous case. It was issued October 22, 1892, insuring such property for the term of one year to the amount of $1,250. The complaint alleged all the facts necessary to a recovery. ’ The answer put in issue the amount of the loss, and the issue thus raised was the only one litigated on the trial. There was a motion for a change of venue to the circuit court made and denied. The objection to the granting of such motion was thereafter withdrawn by stipulation, and an order entered changing the place of trial. Defendant failed to pay the clerk’s fees and have the papers transmitted within the time prescribed by statute. The clerk refused to transmit the papers after the expiration of such time, and thereupon defendant moved the court for an order for such transmission, which motion was denied, and defendant excepted thereto. At the close of the plaintiff’s case, defendant’s counsel moved the Court for a nonsuit, which was overruled. No evidence was offered by defendant. On motion of plaintiff’s counsel, the court directed a verdict in plaintiff’s favor for $1,101.89, the full amount claimed. There was a motion to set the verdict aside as against the evidence and for errors committed on the trial, which was overruled and excepted to. Judgment was entered in plaintiff’s favor upon the verdict, and defendant appealed.
For the appellant there was a brief by 'Miller, Noyes, Miller <& Wahl, attorneys, and J. V. Quarles, of counsel, and oral argument by Geo. P. Miller and Mr. Quarles.
For the respondent there was a brief by Timlm <& Glicks-man, and oral argument by Nathan Glioksmam.

Opinion:
Maeshall, J.
The only questions presented on this appeal relate to proceedings for a change of venue and to the exceptions taken to the admission of evidence of the con tents of plaintiff's books, without any foundation being laid therefor. The same questions were raised and determined in F. Dohmen Co. v. Niagara Fire Ins. Co., ante, p. 38. The decision in that case rules this, and requires a reversal of the judgment appealed from.
By the Court.— The judgment of the superior court is reversed, and the cause remanded for a new trial.