Cleveland v. Tepaske

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Cleveland v. Tepaske

296 N.W. 73, 236 Wis. 626, 1941 Wisc. LEXIS 379

Wisconsin Supreme Court·Decided January 6, 1941·Published

Opinion

Fairchild, J.

We find among the alleged errors nothing to warrant any interference by this court with the judgment entered below, and the case is affirmed under Rule 64, sec. 251.64, Stats.

Because of the failure of appellants to serve the printed case and brief within the time allotted by Rules 16 and 18, *627 secs. 251.272 and 251.274, Stats., respondents are entitled to double costs under sec. 251.23 (3), Stats. An allowance of damages is not made because of the existence in this case of reasons stated in the case of Kniess v. Jefferson Construction Co., ante, p. 624, 296 N. W. 72.

By the Court. — Judgment affirmed. Respondents awarded double costs.

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

Fairchild, J.

We find among the alleged errors nothing to warrant any interference by this court with the judgment entered below, and the case is affirmed under Rule 64, sec. 251.64, Stats.

Because of the failure of appellants to serve the printed case and brief within the time allotted by Rules 16 and 18, *627 secs. 251.272 and 251.274, Stats., respondents are entitled to double costs under sec. 251.23 (3), Stats. An allowance of damages is not made because of the existence in this case of reasons stated in the case of Kniess v. Jefferson Construction Co., ante, p. 624, 296 N. W. 72.

By the Court. — Judgment affirmed. Respondents awarded double costs.

Cleveland v. Tepaske, 296 N.W. 73, 236 Wis. 626, 1941 Wisc. LEXIS 379 (Wis. 1941).

Pincite

296 N.W. 73 (Cleveland v. Tepaske) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related