Roman v. Lorence

Action to recover the value of a lot traded by the plaintiff for a farm, and $200 paid in the exchange, the plaintiff claiming that he rescinded for fraud. There was a verdict for the plaintiff against the defendants Lorence and Rayner. The defendant Lorence appeals from the order denying his alternative motion for judgment notwithstanding or a new trial.

The • plaintiff! Roman was the owner of a house and lot in the vicinity of the steel plant in Duluth. It was listed with the defendant Rayner for sale at $2,800. In April, 1921, the lot was traded through the agency of Rayner for a farm in…