Thornton v. Madison Woolen Mills

41 Wis. 265
CourtWisconsin Supreme Court
DecidedAugust 15, 1876
StatusPublished
Cited by5 cases

This text of 41 Wis. 265 (Thornton v. Madison Woolen Mills) 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
Thornton v. Madison Woolen Mills, 41 Wis. 265 (Wis. 1876).

Opinion

Lyon, J.

After the cause was argued in this court, the plaintiffs and the defendant Jones negotiated together concerning the subject matter of the action, and'the result of such negotiation was, that Jones paid the plaintiff a portion of the mortgage debt, or, what is the same thing, a portion of the redemption money called for by the certificate of sale, and the balance thereof in securities, to become due thereafter, and also paid the costs in this court. The plaintiffs accepted 'such money and securities in full payment of the mortgage debt and costs, and thereupon caused the certificate of sale to be canceled. The foreclosure judgment had before that time been formally discharged by an entry of the cleric of the circuit court to that effect in the record. This is more than a mere redemption.

It seems to us that these transactions dispose of the whole subject of the litigation, and amount to a discontinuance j of the action. They are in the nature of an accord and satisfaction puns dcvrrein continuance, and leave nothing for adjudication. Kercheval v. Doty, 31 Wis., 476.

Had this whole controversy been submitted to arbitrators, and had the arbitrators awarded that the parties should do precisely what they have done, there can be no doubt that the submission and award, under several decisions of this court, would have worked a discontinuance of the action. Bigelow v. Goss, 5 Wis., 421, and cases cited in note by Dixon, O. J. We perceive no difference in principle between such a case and one where, as in the present case, the parties adjust the controversy themselves.

The motion to dismiss the appeal must be granted, but without costs.

By the Gowrt. — Appeal dismissed.

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

Related

Scott v. Columbia Savings & Loan Ass'n
49 P.2d 488 (Wyoming Supreme Court, 1935)
Signor v. Clark
99 N.W. 68 (North Dakota Supreme Court, 1904)
Ray v. Hixon
62 N.W. 922 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1895)
Laflin v. Chicago, W. & N. Ry. Co.
34 F. 859 (U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Wisconsin, 1887)
Sloane v. Anderson
13 N.W. 684 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1883)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
41 Wis. 265, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/thornton-v-madison-woolen-mills-wis-1876.