Payne v. Jelleff

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Payne v. Jelleff

30 N.W. 526, 67 Wis. 246, 1886 Wisc. LEXIS 141

CourtWisconsin Supreme Court

DecidedNovember 23, 1886

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 30 N.W. 526 (Payne v. Jelleff) 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

Payne v. Jelleff, 30 N.W. 526, 67 Wis. 246, 1886 Wisc. LEXIS 141 (Wis. 1886).

Pincite

Opinion

Cassoday, J.

There seems to have been sufficient evidence before the justice to sustain the verdict. If the evidence showed the plaintiff’s indebtedness a dollar less than the verdict, still it would not have authorized the reversal. The plaintiff’s bill of particulars showed the plaintiff’s charges to have been made against the defendant and one Bannon. It is urged that this made it a claim against the two jointly. There is no pretense that they were partners or .in any way associated in business. The livery was not for. their joint use, but for political purposes. Each had livery rigs from the plaintiff, and the defendant only seems to have been held responsible for what was furnished at his request No joint liability was established. The defendant was properly held liable in the justice’s court.

By the Court.— The judgment of the county court is reversed, and the cause is remanded with direction to affirm the judgment of the justice.

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

Cassoday, J.

There seems to have been sufficient evidence before the justice to sustain the verdict. If the evidence showed the plaintiff’s indebtedness a dollar less than the verdict, still it would not have authorized the reversal. The plaintiff’s bill of particulars showed the plaintiff’s charges to have been made against the defendant and one Bannon. It is urged that this made it a claim against the two jointly. There is no pretense that they were partners or .in any way associated in business. The livery was not for. their joint use, but for political purposes. Each had livery rigs from the plaintiff, and the defendant only seems to have been held responsible for what was furnished at his request No joint liability was established. The defendant was properly held liable in the justice’s court.

By the Court.— The judgment of the county court is reversed, and the cause is remanded with direction to affirm the judgment of the justice.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

30 N.W. 526, 67 Wis. 246, 1886 Wisc. LEXIS 141, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/payne-v-jelleff-wis-1886.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack