(DOWNLOAD) "Lipinski Et Al. v. Lipinski Et Al." by Supreme Court of Wisconsin # Book PDF Kindle ePub Free

eBook details

Title: Lipinski Et Al. v. Lipinski Et Al.
Author : Supreme Court of Wisconsin
Release Date : January 08, 1952
Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
Pages : * pages
Size : 65 KB

Description

Action commenced August 14, 1950 by Martin A. Lipinski and Bernice M. Lipinski, his wife, against Rose Lipinski, Richard Lipinski and Anna Lipinski, his wife, George Lipinski and Beverly Lipinski, his wife, Mildred Gramowski, Andrew M. Lipinski and Angeline Lipinski, his wife, and Margaret Jezewski. Judgment was for dismissal of action. The complaint alleged the ownership of land situated in the town of Maiden Rock, County of Pierce, State of Wisconsin, described as 'All that part of the SW 1/4 SW 1/4, of Section 8, township 24 north, range 16 west, lying south of the right of way of the C B & Q Railroad.' It further appears from the pleadings that the premises are on the shore line of Lake Pepin and are used for commercial fishing purposes 'upon which are located nets and apparatus for such commercial fishing. That the defendants have entered upon the lands of the plaintiffs which the plaintiffs had used for such purposes, and have excluded the plaintiffs therefrom, and have forcibly established their own nets and fishing apparatus upon the lands of the plaintiffs to the exclusion of the plaintiffs, and as a result the plaintiffs have been deprived of the use and enjoyment of said premises, and of the profits from such commercial fishing operations.' There are other allegations consistent with and supporting a cause of action for ejectment. When analyzed, with the provisions of the statutes and the doctrine of well considered cases in mind, the complaint is based on facts showing the plaintiffs' present right of possession and that they have not lost their right to recover the premises. However, the plaintiffs, instead of pursuing the usual course in the matter of an action in ejectment, sought relief by way of injunction. The defendants denied the allegations of the complaint and alleged the previous establishment of a line, and in effect claimed a right to occupy the premises as described in the complaint. At the Conclusion of the trial, in dismissing the complaint, the trial court said: 'I have carefully checked the evidence and find no basis upon which the Court could properly issue an injunction. It is therefore not necessary to decide which of the two rails is the proper marker and the one mentioned as 'the point of curve' in the judgment entered June 25, 1949.