Lathrop v. Snyder

17 Wis. 110
CourtWisconsin Supreme Court
DecidedJanuary 15, 1863
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 17 Wis. 110 (Lathrop v. Snyder) 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
Lathrop v. Snyder, 17 Wis. 110 (Wis. 1863).

Opinion

By the Court,

Cole, J.

These actions were brought upon promissory notes. In each case the defendant below admitted the execution of the notes, and that the amounts therein stated were due, after deducting the counter-claims mentioned in the answers. The plaintiffs then made application to. the clerk to enter judgments for the amounts so admitted to be due after deducting the counter-claims, in conformity to .the practice prescribed in subdivision 4, sec. 27, chap. 132, R. S. It is claimed that this provision of law is invalid, because it attempts to confer upon the clerk judicial power vested only in courts.

This point has been decided adversely to the defendant in several cases which have come before this court, and the practice here adopted has been sustained. Blaikie v. Griswold, 10 Wis., 294; Wells v. Morton, id., 468. No good reason was shown in the court below for setting aside the judgments, and the applications for that purpose were properly denied.

The orders of the circuit court are affirmed, with costs.

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

Related

Hocking Valley Railway Co. v. Cluster Coal & Feed Co.
97 Ohio St. (N.S.) 140 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1918)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
17 Wis. 110, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lathrop-v-snyder-wis-1863.