Burlingame v. Burlingame

18 Wis. 285
Wisconsin Supreme Court·Decided June 15, 1864·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

By the Court,

Dixon, C. J.

Consensus tollit errorem. The parties consented that the jury might seal their verdict, deliver it to the clerk, and disperse to their homes and not return.

No exceptions were taken to the charge and no question can be made upon it.

The statute (Priv. Laws of 1861, ch. 302, sec. 6), requiring the board of supervisors of the town and the common council of the city to select and return the names of persons qualified to serve as jurors before the last day of May in each year, is directory. If properly selected and returned afterwards, it is no ground of challenge. See Mills v. Johnson, 17 Wis., 598.

Judgment affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Burlingame v. Burlingame, 18 Wis. 285 (Wis. 1864).

18 Wis. 285 (Burlingame v. Burlingame) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

City of Appleton v. Outagamie County
220 N.W. 393 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1928)
Application of Clark
115 N.W. 387 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1908)
Bedal v. Spurr
22 N.W. 390 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1885)
Brothers v. Pickel
31 N.J. Eq. 647 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1879)