Opinion ID: 1807337
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Discretionary reversal under sec. 251.09, Stats.

Text: In Lorenz v. Wolff (1970), 45 Wis. 2d 407, 173 N. W. 2d 129, this court made it clear that the rule usually applied in granting a discretionary reversalthat the evidence and the law must be such that the appellant probably should have wonis not the sole criteria governing this court's exercise of its power under sec. 251.09, Stats. The court noted that discretionary reversal was warranted when it is probable that justice has miscarried for any reason.  But even under this liberal standard appellants are unable to point to any reason why justice has miscarried. The trial judge correctly applied the existing case law, and the appellants are not entitled to a reversal. We conclude that this case has been tried on its merits. The trial court has rendered a judgment which draws the boundary between the property of the parties in accordance with their respective deeds. By the Court. Judgment and order affirmed.