Landman v. Rashman

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Landman v. Rashman

217 N.W. 649, 195 Wis. 33, 1928 Wisc. LEXIS 58

Wisconsin Supreme Court·Decided February 7, 1928·Published

Opinion

Vinje, C. J.

It will be observed that the order appealed from is not a final order in a contempt proceeding because it [35]*35contemplates that the matter shall go back to the commissioner and the defendant shall be questioned further, and it is only in case he persists in his refusal to answer that the order of the commissioner shall become operative.

The order appealed from is a contingent one, to become effective only in case there is a second refusal by defendant to answer the questions. The opportunity for a second refusal has not been afforded him and we cannot say what he would do if questioned again. To be appealable an order must finally dispose of the matter under consideration, not contingently merely.

By the Court. — Appeal dismissed.

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

Vinje, C. J.

It will be observed that the order appealed from is not a final order in a contempt proceeding because it [35]*35contemplates that the matter shall go back to the commissioner and the defendant shall be questioned further, and it is only in case he persists in his refusal to answer that the order of the commissioner shall become operative.

The order appealed from is a contingent one, to become effective only in case there is a second refusal by defendant to answer the questions. The opportunity for a second refusal has not been afforded him and we cannot say what he would do if questioned again. To be appealable an order must finally dispose of the matter under consideration, not contingently merely.

By the Court. — Appeal dismissed.

Landman v. Rashman, 217 N.W. 649, 195 Wis. 33, 1928 Wisc. LEXIS 58 (Wis. 1928).

Pincite

217 N.W. 649 (Landman v. Rashman) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.