Ely v. Daily

40 Wis. 52
CourtWisconsin Supreme Court
DecidedJanuary 15, 1876
StatusPublished
Cited by16 cases

This text of 40 Wis. 52 (Ely v. Daily) 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
Ely v. Daily, 40 Wis. 52 (Wis. 1876).

Opinion

Ryan, C. J.

The only defense in this cause is payment. And upon that issue there is conflicting evidence, so nearly balanced that we are unable to hold that there is a preponderance one way or the other. Had the question been submitted to a jury, no court, for aught that appears in this record, would think of disturbing a verdict for either party.

This case is a witness to the wisdom of C. J. Dixon’s comments in Snyder v. Wright, 13 Wis., 689, on the unfitness of submitting mere issues of fact to this court. To us, the depositions here are impersonal. We have no means of weighing the witnesses or comparing their intelligence and credibility. The evidence is a mere dead lock of contradiction.

When the testimony, in such a case, is taken before the judge of the court below, he has the advantage of seeing and hearing the witnesses. And even when, as in this case, the evidence is taken before a referee, the judge may well have opportunity, not shared by us, of appreciating the character and intelligence of the parties and their witnesses, to aid him in determining the weight of the evidence. And it is only upon apparent, satisfactory preponderance of evidence, that we feel authorized to reverse the findings of fact of a circuit judge. Murphy v. Dunning, 30 Wis., 296.

Eor this reason the judgment of the court below is affirmed.

By the Oou/rt. — Judgment affirmed.

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

Related

Donner v. Genz
107 N.W. 1039 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1906)
Johnson v. Goult
82 N.W. 139 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1900)
Momsen v. Plankinton
71 N.W. 98 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1897)
La Coursier v. Russell
52 N.W. 176 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1892)
Pierce v. Manning
51 N.W. 332 (South Dakota Supreme Court, 1892)
Hosmer v. McDonald
49 N.W. 112 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1891)
Carrier v. Atwood
63 Wis. 301 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1885)
Althouse v. Baldwin
14 N.W. 441 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1882)
Gœtz v. Salomon
13 N.W. 234 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1882)
James v. Cutler
10 N.W. 147 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1882)
Stanley v. Risse
5 N.W. 467 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1880)
Drummond v. Huyssen
46 Wis. 188 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1879)
Union National Bank v. Roberts
45 Wis. 373 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1878)
Cunningham v. Brown
44 Wis. 72 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1878)
Monitor Iron Works Co. v. Ketchum
44 Wis. 126 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1878)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
40 Wis. 52, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ely-v-daily-wis-1876.