Mills v. National Fire Insurance
This text of 65 N.W. 730 (Mills v. National Fire Insurance) 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.
Opinion
Assuming that the notice of trial was premature and irregular, it is an irregularity merely, and does not go to the jurisdiction of the court. Pier v. Storm, 37 Wis. 247. Such irregularity is waived if, after the objection is overruled, the party goes to trial on the merits. If he wishes to stand upon his objection, he must keep out of court for every other purpose. By taking part in the trial, the defendant waived the error of overruling his objection. Barker v. Knickerbocker L. Ins. Co. 24 Wis. 630; Gorton v. Bailey, 46 Wis. 633; Newman v. Board, 74 Wis. 303. The affidavit for continuance was not sufficient, under the rule, and it was not error to refuse the continuance.
By the Court.— The judgment of the circuit court is affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
65 N.W. 730, 92 Wis. 90, 1896 Wisc. LEXIS 222, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mills-v-national-fire-insurance-wis-1896.