Legal Opinion

Vennum v. Gregory

Supreme Court of Iowa

Decided October 19, 1866PublishedCited by 14 opinions

Appeal from Fcn/ette District Court. The plaintiffs claim in their petition that they advanced to the defendant certain money to buy for them, and as their agent, a lot of cattle recommended by the defendant to them, and belonging to a neighbor; and that the defendant bought the cattle at one price and represented to plaintiffs that he had paid another and greater price.

Read the full summary

Appeal from Fcn/ette District Court. The plaintiffs claim in their petition that they advanced to the defendant certain money to buy for them, and as their agent, a lot of cattle recommended by the defendant to them, and belonging to a neighbor; and that the defendant bought the cattle at one price and represented to plaintiffs that he had paid another and greater price. The defendant, in his answer, claims that he sold the • cattle to the plaintiffs at the greater price, as agreed between them, and that he was not acting, nor was he in fact the agent of plaintiffs to purchase them. A jury…

1Opinion of the CourtCole, J.

The evidence fully sustains the findings of fact by the court. The only questions for us to determine, are as to the correctness of the legal conclusions or adjudications upon those facts.

*328i. intersenc'e1ofb‘ damages. The District Court allowed plaintiffs ten per cent per annum interest, upon the excess of the amount received over the. amount paid out, as damages. This was erroneous. The rate of interest is six per cen^ unless a different rate -be agreed upon and expressed in writing. Rev., § 1787. And although interest was allowed in this case as damages, it was not competent for the court to…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Thrift v. RedmanSupreme Court of Iowa · 1862

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Hahl v. KelloggCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1906
  2. Popejoy v. EastburnSupreme Court of Iowa · 1950
  3. Bingham v. KeylorWashington Supreme Court · 1901
  4. Sutherland v. GuthrieWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1920
  5. Paul v. Minneapolis Threshing Machine Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1901

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API