Gunsten v. Gordon
Wisconsin Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the circuit court for Waupaca county: Byeon B. Paek, Circuit Judge. This is an action upon express contract. The complaint sets forth two causes of action; the first for the purchase price of two colts alleged to have been sold by plaintiff to the defendants through one Orrin Loomis acting as defendants’ agent; the second is for the value of a horse owned by plaintiff and taken and sold by defendants without plaintiff’s authority.
Read the full summary
Appeal from a judgment of the circuit court for Waupaca county: Byeon B. Paek, Circuit Judge. This is an action upon express contract. The complaint sets forth two causes of action; the first for the purchase price of two colts alleged to have been sold by plaintiff to the defendants through one Orrin Loomis acting as defendants’ agent; the second is for the value of a horse owned by plaintiff and taken and sold by defendants without plaintiff’s authority. The answer is a general denial as to both causes of action. The claim is for $268, the purchase price of two colts and interest, under the…
1Opinion of the CourtKeRWim-, J.
The main question here is whether the evidence is sufficient to support the answey to the first question of the special verdict, namely, that Loomis acted as agent of defendants in purchasing the colts in question.' The trial court held that the answer to the first question was not sup*483ported by evidence and changed it from “Yes” to “ÜSTo,” and we cannot say that the court' below was in error in so doing. There was very little pertinent evidence on the question of agency. Counsel for appellant cite us to some facts and circumstances from which they claim a jury could legitimately infer an…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Ætna Insurance v. North-Western Iron Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1867
3Cited by2 opinions
- Sater v. Cities Service Oil Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1940
- In re SchmidtDistrict Court, E.D. Wisconsin · 1962