Armstrong v. Prentice
This text of 56 N.W. 742 (Armstrong v. Prentice) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Wisconsin Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
There is little to be said in this case. The questions at issue were purely questions of fact, which the jury have settled upon what seems to us sufficient evidence and substantially correct instructions. It is objected that the plaintiff has recovered for attendance as a witness a sum largely in excess of legal fees, and that a promise to pay a witness more than legal fees for his attendance is void, because he is simply performing a legal duty. However this may be in a case where the attendance of the witness may be' compelled by subpoena, it certainly does not apply in a case like the present, where the actions were pending in another state and the witness could not be compelled to attend. In the latter case, it is evident that there is sufficient consideration to support a promise to pay additional compensation.
By the Court.— Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
56 N.W. 742, 86 Wis. 210, 1893 Wisc. LEXIS 151, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/armstrong-v-prentice-wis-1893.