ESTATE OF TEASDALE


264 Wis. 1 (1953)

ESTATE OF TEASDALE: TEASDALE (Flora) and others, Appellants, vs. TEASDALE (HOWARD) and others, Respondents.

Supreme Court of Wisconsin.

May 5, 1953.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

For the appellants there were briefs by Aberg, Bell, Blake & Conrad, Wm. J.P. Aberg, Glen H. Bell, and Charles P. Siebold, all of Madison, and Rice, Rice & Rice and Z.S. Rice, all of Sparta, and oral argument by Mr. Aberg and Mr. Seibold.

For the appellant Flora Teasdale there was a brief by Bull & Biart of Madison, and oral argument by Benjamin H. Bull.

For the respondents Howard Teasdale and Joseph Teasdale there was a brief by Donovan, Gleiss, Goodman, Breitenfield & Gleiss of Sparta, and oral argument by Leo J. Goodman and William M. Gleiss.

For the respondent Loretta Teasdale there was a brief by Winton & Winton of Shell Lake, and oral argument by Ward Winton.


MARTIN, J.

It is conceded that five separate requirements must be met by the trustees before a new trial will be granted on the ground of newly discovered evidence:

1. The evidence must have come to their knowledge after the trial.

2. They must not have been negligent in seeking to discover it.

3. The evidence must be material to the issue.

4. The evidence must not be merely cumulative to testimony introduced at the trial.

5...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases