Fred Miller Brewing Co. v. City of Milwaukee

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Fred Miller Brewing Co. v. City of Milwaukee

143 N.W. 1066, 155 Wis. 81, 1913 Wisc. LEXIS 291

CourtWisconsin Supreme Court

DecidedNovember 18, 1913

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 143 N.W. 1066 (Fred Miller Brewing Co. v. City of Milwaukee) 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

Fred Miller Brewing Co. v. City of Milwaukee, 143 N.W. 1066, 155 Wis. 81, 1913 Wisc. LEXIS 291 (Wis. 1913).

Pincite

Opinion

Maesiiall, J.

Notwithstanding the skilful analysis by appellant’s counsel to demonstrate error of the trial court in holding that the evidence established an illegal change of grade injuriously affecting respondent’s property, it is not convincing. There is no need to follow such analysis in detail or demonstrate the correctness of the decision below. Suffice it to say, that, as we view the record, it does not clearly condemn such decision. To what extent the change [83]*83injuriously affected respondent’s property is a jury question subject to control by the trial court to prevent injustice.

Whether the trial court erred- in granting a new trial because the verdict was contrary to the evidence is ruled in respondent’s favor by the principle that an order in that regard is discretionary and will not be disturbed on appeal unless clearly granted in abuse'of judicial authority.

By the Court. — The order is affirmed.

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

Maesiiall, J.

Notwithstanding the skilful analysis by appellant’s counsel to demonstrate error of the trial court in holding that the evidence established an illegal change of grade injuriously affecting respondent’s property, it is not convincing. There is no need to follow such analysis in detail or demonstrate the correctness of the decision below. Suffice it to say, that, as we view the record, it does not clearly condemn such decision. To what extent the change [83]*83injuriously affected respondent’s property is a jury question subject to control by the trial court to prevent injustice.

Whether the trial court erred- in granting a new trial because the verdict was contrary to the evidence is ruled in respondent’s favor by the principle that an order in that regard is discretionary and will not be disturbed on appeal unless clearly granted in abuse'of judicial authority.

By the Court. — The order is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

143 N.W. 1066, 155 Wis. 81, 1913 Wisc. LEXIS 291, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fred-miller-brewing-co-v-city-of-milwaukee-wis-1913.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack