Townsend v. Smith
Wisconsin Supreme Court
47 Wis. 623, 3 N.W. 439 (1879)
- Written by Steven Pacht, JD
Facts
Smith (plaintiff), the owner of a hotel in Oconomowoc, Wisconsin, was unhappy with a review of the hotel that Townsend (defendant) had published in his Chicago, Illinois, newspaper. Smith wished to sue Townsend for libel in connection with the review, but Smith had no way of serving Townsend with process in Illinois. Smith lured Townsend to Wisconsin by falsely telling Townsend that Smith wished to advertise the hotel for sale in Townsend’s newspaper and by offering to pay Townsend’s travel expenses so that Townsend could inspect the hotel in person. Upon Townsend’s arrival in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, Townsend was arrested for criminal libel based on Smith’s complaint about the article. While Townsend was in police custody on the criminal-libel charge, Smith served Townsend with a summons for a civil-libel suit. Through the attempted special appearance of his attorneys, Townsend procured a court order requiring Smith to show cause why the summons should not be quashed due to Smith’s fraud. The order also stayed the proceedings. In response, Smith denied that he had engaged in fraud and averred that he had not thought to serve Townsend with civil process until Townsend already was in police custody in Wisconsin. The circuit court denied Townsend’s motion to quash on the ground that Townsend had waived all objections to how he had been served with process by entering an appearance and obtaining a stay. Townsend appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Lyon, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 806,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.