Souders v. Willig

Opinion by

Linn, J.,

This is an action of replevin. The parties agree that by his distraint for rent in arrear the landlord seized plaintiff’s automobile, worth $750, on leased premises occupied by defendant’s tenant. The jury found for plaintiff; defendant moved for a new trial and for judgment n. o. v., and both motions were refused.- At the trial, after placing on the record their agreement of facts just stated, counsel for plaintiff said “so the only question is whether the automobile belonged to Souders [plaintiff] at the time or not; ” to which counsel for defendant replied “the only…