Klooz v. Hood

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Klooz v. Hood

136 N.W. 641, 150 Wis. 208, 1912 Wisc. LEXIS 200

CourtWisconsin Supreme Court

DecidedJune 4, 1912

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 136 N.W. 641 (Klooz v. Hood) 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

Klooz v. Hood, 136 N.W. 641, 150 Wis. 208, 1912 Wisc. LEXIS 200 (Wis. 1912).

Pincite

Opinion

Winslow, O. I.

The judgment appealed from is to be based upon the finding of adverse possession of the disputed strip by the plaintiff and her grantors for more than twenty years prior to the removal of defendant’s bam, and it is. frankly admitted by the appellant that unless this finding be overturned there is no necessity of considering any other questions.

This is purely a question of fact involving no consideration of legal principles, but simply a review of the evidence. We have carefully made such a review, and find that there is. ample evidence to the effect that the plaintiff and her grantors, through their various tenants, used the disputed strip as a driveway for considerably more than twenty years prior to the removal of the defendant’s bam. No extended review of the-evidence would be of any value.

By the Court. — Judgment affirmed.

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

Winslow, O. I.

The judgment appealed from is to be based upon the finding of adverse possession of the disputed strip by the plaintiff and her grantors for more than twenty years prior to the removal of defendant’s bam, and it is. frankly admitted by the appellant that unless this finding be overturned there is no necessity of considering any other questions.

This is purely a question of fact involving no consideration of legal principles, but simply a review of the evidence. We have carefully made such a review, and find that there is. ample evidence to the effect that the plaintiff and her grantors, through their various tenants, used the disputed strip as a driveway for considerably more than twenty years prior to the removal of the defendant’s bam. No extended review of the-evidence would be of any value.

By the Court. — Judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

136 N.W. 641, 150 Wis. 208, 1912 Wisc. LEXIS 200, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/klooz-v-hood-wis-1912.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack