Opinion ID: 2167974
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Plaintiff as the Real Party in Interest.

Text: Defendant argues that the assignments in plaintiff's chain of title to the cause of action are conditional and not absolute.  On this ground he asks for judgment notwithstanding the verdict because the action was not prosecuted in the name of the real party in interest as required by sec. 260.13, Stats. It is unnecessary to decide whether Mr. Monday has an interest sufficient to satisfy the demand of the statute because all the other parties were and still are in the case. The case was prosecuted in Robert W. Monday's name alone only as far as the jury was concerned because of the reduction of the caption. Error, if any, in this regard was nonprejudicial because the sole question for determination on this trial was fair market value. Defendant also argues that the appeal from the basic award was not perfected by the proper party because at the time the last notices of appeal to circuit court were served a receiver had been appointed for the P. C. Monday Tea Company. This argument was made for the first time on appeal. Defendant interpleaded numerous parties to this action. It went to trial on the merits. It is foreclosed now from complaining about procedural irregularities.