Tbe rule in Wisconsin

1912Co. v. Sivyer, 112 Wis. 442 , 88 N. W. 317 ; Harrigan v. Gilchrist, 121 Wis. 127 , 99 N. W. 909 . 4.

1912Co. v. Sivyer, 112 Wis. 442 , 88 N. W. 317 ; Harrigan v. Gilchrist, 121 Wis. 127 , 99 N. W. 909 . 4.

1908Tbe rule as to when it should be given and when not is clearly laid down by this court in the late case of Pumorlo v. Merrill, 125 Wis. 102 , 103 N. W. 464 .

1908Tbe rule as to when it should be given and when not is clearly laid down by this court in the late case of Pumorlo v. Merrill, 125 Wis. 102 , 103 N. W. 464 .

1871This question was fully discussed by Mr. Justice PAINE, in Dreher v. the Town of Fitchburg, 22 Wis., 675 , where tbe very point was presented.

1871This is tbe rule of all judicial decisions upon tbe subject, of wbicb, in this court, see Dreher v. Fitchburg, 22 Wis., 675 , and Ward v. Milwaukee and St.

1918Austin v. Saveland’s Estate, 77 Wis. 108 , 45 N. W. 955 .

1918Austin v. Saveland’s Estate, 77 Wis. 108 , 45 N. W. 955 .

1917It is cited in some late text-books with Van Etten v. Noyes, 128 App. Div. 406 , 112 N. Y.

1917It is cited in some late text-books with Van Etten v. Noyes, 128 App. Div. 406 , 112 N. Y.

1917The reasoning in Jenkinson v. Coggins, 123 Mich. 7 , 81 N. W. 974 , rather impresses me that if tbe question were presented anew, tbe doctrine of tbe Elliott Case would be overruled.

1917The reasoning in Jenkinson v. Coggins, 123 Mich. 7 , 81 N. W. 974 , rather impresses me that if tbe question were presented anew, tbe doctrine of tbe Elliott Case would be overruled.

1916Tbe complaint set out every •element of tbe offense defined by tbe statute in conformity with the rule applied in Schaeffer v. State, 113 Wis. 595 , 89 N. W. 481 .

1916Tbe complaint set out every •element of tbe offense defined by tbe statute in conformity with the rule applied in Schaeffer v. State, 113 Wis. 595 , 89 N. W. 481 .

1916While it has been spoken of by some writers with a measure of discredit, as this court remarked in Marling v. FitzGerald, 138 Wis. 93 , 120 N. W. 388 , “It is entitled to the distinction of being one of the greatest instrumentalities to promote the ends of justice which the equity of the law affords.” Where the facts call for its application in order to prevent injustice being done, it “has the field to itself” superseding all other rules which have not fully acted upon the particular situation.

1916While it has been spoken of by some writers with a measure of discredit, as this court remarked in Marling v. FitzGerald, 138 Wis. 93 , 120 N. W. 388 , “It is entitled to the distinction of being one of the greatest instrumentalities to promote the ends of justice which the equity of the law affords.” Where the facts call for its application in order to prevent injustice being done, it “has the field to itself” superseding all other rules which have not fully acted upon the particular situation.

1915Tbe cases of Kreutzer v. Lynch, 122 Wis. 474 , 100 N. W. 887 , and Inglis v. Fohey, 136 Wis. 28 , 116 N. W. 857 , relied upon by defendants to tbe effect that plaintiff waived tbe tender by refusing to accept tbe money, do not apply to a case like tbe one at bar where tbe dispute is as to tbe amount due.

1915Tbe cases of Kreutzer v. Lynch, 122 Wis. 474 , 100 N. W. 887 , and Inglis v. Fohey, 136 Wis. 28 , 116 N. W. 857 , relied upon by defendants to tbe effect that plaintiff waived tbe tender by refusing to accept tbe money, do not apply to a case like tbe one at bar where tbe dispute is as to tbe amount due.

1915Tbe cases of Kreutzer v. Lynch, 122 Wis. 474 , 100 N. W. 887 , and Inglis v. Fohey, 136 Wis. 28 , 116 N. W. 857 , relied upon by defendants to tbe effect that plaintiff waived tbe tender by refusing to accept tbe money, do not apply to a case like tbe one at bar where tbe dispute is as to tbe amount due.

1915Tbe cases of Kreutzer v. Lynch, 122 Wis. 474 , 100 N. W. 887 , and Inglis v. Fohey, 136 Wis. 28 , 116 N. W. 857 , relied upon by defendants to tbe effect that plaintiff waived tbe tender by refusing to accept tbe money, do not apply to a case like tbe one at bar where tbe dispute is as to tbe amount due.

1913Taylor v. Brown, 1 Wis. 513 .

1912In Shepard v. Jacobs, 204 Mass. 110 , 90 N. E. 392 , where tbe court bad under consideration tbe question, it is said: “Tbe management of an automobile properly can be trusted only to a skilled expert.

1912In Shepard v. Jacobs, 204 Mass. 110 , 90 N. E. 392 , where tbe court bad under consideration tbe question, it is said: “Tbe management of an automobile properly can be trusted only to a skilled expert.

1912It may, however, be laid down as a general rule that when a duty to a third person is intrusted to tbe agent by tbe principal, as between such third person and tbe principal tbe principal is liable for failure of tbe agent to perform.' In Jones v. Glass, supra, Chief Justice Ruffin, speaking for tbe court, said: “If tbe defendant would have been thus liable for tbe act, bad it been that of bis own band, be is, as bailee, equally liable for it as the act of one to whose control and management be committed tbe slaves.” Tbe doctrine is well stated in Wood in bis work on Master & Servant, sec. 321

1912Tbe claim that tbe principal contractors, Martin & Wig-man, and their obligor have no interest in tbe liabilities arising out of tbe contract and tbe bond of tbe Kirhmcm Construction Compcmy and its obligor is not tenable, because tbe demands of all tbe parties are connected with and relate to tbe subject of enforcing liens against tbe premises of tbe hotel company and of obtaining tbe payment of tbe debts, or, as declared in sec. 2656a, Stats. (1898), they involve and affect “tbe contract, transaction or property which is tbe sub ject matter of tbe action.” In the case of Gager v. Marsden, 10

1912Tbe claim that tbe principal contractors, Martin & Wig-man, and their obligor have no interest in tbe liabilities arising out of tbe contract and tbe bond of tbe Kirhmcm Construction Compcmy and its obligor is not tenable, because tbe demands of all tbe parties are connected with and relate to tbe subject of enforcing liens against tbe premises of tbe hotel company and of obtaining tbe payment of tbe debts, or, as declared in sec. 2656a, Stats. (1898), they involve and affect “tbe contract, transaction or property which is tbe sub ject matter of tbe action.” In the case of Gager v. Marsden, 10

1912Co. v. Sivyer, 112 Wis. 442 , 88 N. W. 317 ; Harrigan v. Gilchrist, 121 Wis. 127 , 99 N. W. 909 . 4.

1912Co. v. Sivyer, 112 Wis. 442 , 88 N. W. 317 ; Harrigan v. Gilchrist, 121 Wis. 127 , 99 N. W. 909 . 4.

1912Tbe claim that tbe principal contractors, Martin & Wig-man, and their obligor have no interest in tbe liabilities arising out of tbe contract and tbe bond of tbe Kirhmcm Construction Compcmy and its obligor is not tenable, because tbe demands of all tbe parties are connected with and relate to tbe subject of enforcing liens against tbe premises of tbe hotel company and of obtaining tbe payment of tbe debts, or, as declared in sec. 2656a, Stats. (1898), they involve and affect “tbe contract, transaction or property which is tbe sub ject matter of tbe action.” In the case of Gager v. Marsden, 10

1911McFarland v. Lindekugel, 107 Wis. 474 , 83 N. W. 757 ; Tilly v. Mitchell & L.

1911McFarland v. Lindekugel, 107 Wis. 474 , 83 N. W. 757 ; Tilly v. Mitchell & L.

1911Co. 136 Wis. 380 , 117 N. W. 852 , tbe refusal of this instruction was declared to be prejudicial error, tbe court stating: “Where a decision in a party’s favor depends largely upon tbe weight to be given to his own evidence, and a request to give such an instruction as above is made, it is error to refuse it where tbe principle ■embodied in such instruction is not covered by tbe charge.” Tbe inquiry arises: Was it error in tbe instant case?

1911Co. 136 Wis. 380 , 117 N. W. 852 , tbe refusal of this instruction was declared to be prejudicial error, tbe court stating: “Where a decision in a party’s favor depends largely upon tbe weight to be given to his own evidence, and a request to give such an instruction as above is made, it is error to refuse it where tbe principle ■embodied in such instruction is not covered by tbe charge.” Tbe inquiry arises: Was it error in tbe instant case?

1909Donner v. Genz, 129 Wis. 246 , 107 N. W. 1039 , 109 N. W. 71 ; Brunkow v. Waters, 131 Wis. 31 , 110 N. W. 802 .

1909Donner v. Genz, 129 Wis. 246 , 107 N. W. 1039 , 109 N. W. 71 ; Brunkow v. Waters, 131 Wis. 31 , 110 N. W. 802 .

1909Donner v. Genz, 129 Wis. 246 , 107 N. W. 1039 , 109 N. W. 71 ; Brunkow v. Waters, 131 Wis. 31 , 110 N. W. 802 .

1909State v. Lloyd, 133 Wis. 468 , 113 N. W. 964 .

1909State v. Lloyd, 133 Wis. 468 , 113 N. W. 964 .

1907Wheeler v. Westport, 30 Wis. 392 , and cases cited in opinion.

1907Kercheval v. Doty, 31 Wis. 476 ; Baumann v. Lupinski, 108 Wis. 451 , 84 N. W. 836 ; Linde v. Gudden, 109 Wis. 326 , 85 N. W. 323 .

1907Tbe rule in Campau v. Moran, supra, and some Michigan decisions following it were referred to.

1907Kercheval v. Doty, 31 Wis. 476 ; Baumann v. Lupinski, 108 Wis. 451 , 84 N. W. 836 ; Linde v. Gudden, 109 Wis. 326 , 85 N. W. 323 .

1907Kercheval v. Doty, 31 Wis. 476 ; Baumann v. Lupinski, 108 Wis. 451 , 84 N. W. 836 ; Linde v. Gudden, 109 Wis. 326 , 85 N. W. 323 .

1907Kercheval v. Doty, 31 Wis. 476 ; Baumann v. Lupinski, 108 Wis. 451 , 84 N. W. 836 ; Linde v. Gudden, 109 Wis. 326 , 85 N. W. 323 .

1907Kercheval v. Doty, 31 Wis. 476 ; Baumann v. Lupinski, 108 Wis. 451 , 84 N. W. 836 ; Linde v. Gudden, 109 Wis. 326 , 85 N. W. 323 .

1906Winner v. Kuehn, 97 Wis. 394 , 72 N. W. 227 . 3.

1906Winner v. Kuehn, 97 Wis. 394 , 72 N. W. 227 . 3.

1906Co., post, p. 273, 106 N. W. 1077 ) ; but it was incomplete as a guide in passing upon fraud, and tbe failure to add tbe proper-qualification when requested so to do must be held error. 3.