Producer's Livestock Marketing Ass'n v. Christensen

The main opinion fails to set forth all the facts necessary for an accurate picture of the events giving rise to this litigation; in addition, the opinion totally ignores our familiar and well-established rules of appellate review — which exist to prevent the exact action the majority takes in this case— in order to reach a result not supported by the preponderance of the evidence.1

The case was treated by both parties and the district court primarily as one for an accounting between “partners,” and the court may thus invoke its equitable power to review both questions of law and fact.2 But…