Cody v. Bemis
This text of 40 Wis. 666 (Cody v. Bemis) 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
The complaint avers that the respondent paid the appellants for the bureau in question. The proof is, that he made the payment through a third person, his debtor, who delivered or had delivered logs for him to the appellants, to the amount of the price, for which the respondent gave him credit. If a variance, this is only a variance which could not mislead the appellants, and cannot disturb the judgment here. Harris v. Wicks, 28 Wis., 198; Strahlendorf v. Rosenthal, 30 id., 674; Flanders v. Cottrell, 36 id., 564.
The other matters argued here were pure questions of fact, arising on a conflict of evidence, fairly submitted by the court below to the jury, and which the jury found for the respondent. It is not for us to review such a finding.
By the Court. — The judgment of the court below is affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
40 Wis. 666, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cody-v-bemis-wis-1876.