Segelke & Kohlhaus Manufacturing Co. v. Hulberg

68 N.W. 653, 94 Wis. 106, 1896 Wisc. LEXIS 132
CourtWisconsin Supreme Court
DecidedOctober 13, 1896
StatusPublished

This text of 68 N.W. 653 (Segelke & Kohlhaus Manufacturing Co. v. Hulberg) 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
Segelke & Kohlhaus Manufacturing Co. v. Hulberg, 68 N.W. 653, 94 Wis. 106, 1896 Wisc. LEXIS 132 (Wis. 1896).

Opinion

Winslow, J.

The amendment which the court refused to-grant was an amendment virtually changing the action from an aption to foreclose a subcontractor’s lien into an action to foreclose a principal contractor’s lien, after the expiration of the time in which, it could have filed a claim for a lien as principal contractor. An application to amend the pleadings in a case like the present is addressed to the sound discretion of the court, and the order made on such motion will not be reversed “ unless there is a gross abuse of discretion, or a violation of some well-settled rule of law, or the court proceeded upon a mistaken view of the law.” Phœnix M. L. Ins. Co. v. Walrath, 53 Wis. 669. Under the circumstances of this case, we discover no abuse of discretion in refusing to'allow the amendment; and it does not appear that the circuit court acted under a mistaken view of the law, or violated any well-settled rule of law in making the ruling in question.

By the Cotort.— Order affirmed.

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

Related

Phœnix Mutual Life Insurance v. Walrath
10 N.W. 151 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1882)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
68 N.W. 653, 94 Wis. 106, 1896 Wisc. LEXIS 132, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/segelke-kohlhaus-manufacturing-co-v-hulberg-wis-1896.