Douglass v. Rogers

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Douglass v. Rogers

4 Wis. 304

DecidedJune 15, 1856

StatusPublished

This text of 4 Wis. 304 (Douglass v. Rogers) 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.

Bluebook

Douglass v. Rogers, 4 Wis. 304 (Wis. 1856).

Pincite

Opinion

By the Oourt,

Whitow, C. J.

There can be no doubt that tbe judge before whom this case was tried, committed an error in ruling out tbe depositions of Hubbell and Sims. Tbe parties bad stipulated that they should be used as evidence on tbe trial, reserving to the plaintiff tbe right to object to matters of substance. This reservation could not have tbe effect to prevent their introduction as evidence.

It can be allowed only to have tbe .effect to allow tbe plaintiff to object at tbe trial to matters contained in tbe depositions which might be improper, but cannot have tbe effect to exclude them altogether.

Tbe judgment must, therefore, be reversed.

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

By the Oourt,

Whitow, C. J.

There can be no doubt that tbe judge before whom this case was tried, committed an error in ruling out tbe depositions of Hubbell and Sims. Tbe parties bad stipulated that they should be used as evidence on tbe trial, reserving to the plaintiff tbe right to object to matters of substance. This reservation could not have tbe effect to prevent their introduction as evidence.

It can be allowed only to have tbe .effect to allow tbe plaintiff to object at tbe trial to matters contained in tbe depositions which might be improper, but cannot have tbe effect to exclude them altogether.

Tbe judgment must, therefore, be reversed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

4 Wis. 304, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/douglass-v-rogers-wis-1856.