
    Jason Company, Appellant, vs. Markle and others, Respondents.
    
      May 9
    
    June 5, 1934.
    
    For the appellant there was a brief by Fish, Marshuts & Hoffman, attorneys, and I. A. Fish, Leo W. Slensby, and W. H. Voss of counsel, all of Milwaukee, and oral argument by Mr. Fish.'
    
    For the respondents there was a brief by Olwell & Brady and William T. Gill, all of Milwaukee, and oral argument by Mr. Gill and Mr. Lawrence A. Olwell.
    
   Fowler, J.

This case was argued and submitted with the case of Stott v. Markle (ante, p. 528, 255 N. W. 540), and is ruled by the decision therein.

By the Court. — The portion of the order of the circuit court suppressing examination of the defendants to enable the plaintiff to plead is reversed; the portion quashing the subpcena so far as it commands the production of the things named in the subpoena, is affirmed.  