Shane v. Jacobson
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Action in the district court for Murray county to recover $5,300 for false representations in the sale of land. The case was tried before Nelson, J., and a jury which returned a verdict for the amount demanded. Defendant’s motion for a new trial was granted unless plaintiff consented to a reduction of the verdict to $4,000. From the order granting the motion for a new trial upon that condition, defendant appealed.
1Opinion of the CourtHolt, J.
Action to recover damages for deceit in the sale of a farm. Plaintiff prevailed. Defendant moved for a new trial. The motion was denied on condition that plaintiff consent to a reduction of the verdict to $4,000. The consent was filed, but defendant appeals.
The damages are claimed to be excessive, and this result is laid to alleged errors in the reception or rejection of testimony at the trial. The facts are simple. Early in November, 1913, plaintiff, a farmer *388from Illinois, met defendant, a resident of Iowa, and in company they came to this state to look at a 160-acre farm in Murray county,…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Bullitt v. FarrarSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1889
- Ragon v. Toledo, Ann Arbor & North Michigan Railway Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1893
- Reynolds v. FranklinSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1890
- Redding v. GodwinSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1890
- Wallace v. HallowellSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1894
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Selman v. ShirleyOregon Supreme Court · 1938
- Townsend v. JahrSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1920
- Osborn v. WillSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1931
- Beardmore v. T. D. Burgess Co.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1967
- Forsberg v. BakerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1941
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.