Ostman v. Lee
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Action to recover the price of an automobile alleged to have been sold to the defendant, brought to the Town Court of Stonington and tried to a jury before Fairbrother, J.; verdict for the defendant, which the trial judge set aside as against the evidence, from which the defendant appealed.
1Per curiam
The motion to erase the appeal because of its failure to contain a prayer for relief, is not well taken. We have recently passed upon the precise point, and the reasons there stated are equally applicable here. Douthwright v. Champlin, 91 Conn. 524, 531, 100 Atl. 97.
The motion to set aside the verdict was properly granted. The plaintiff offered evidence to prove that the defendant, after examination, on May 5th, 1915; agreed to purchase an old automobile belonging to him for $150 payable in two weeks; that the defendant took the automobile into his possession on the same afternoon and still…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Douthwright v. ChamplinSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1917
3Cited by3 opinions
- L. Albert & Son v. Armstrong Rubber Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1949
- Aetna Chemical Co. v. Spaulding & Kimball Co.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1924
- Detroit Vapor Stove Co. v. Farmers' Cash UnionUtah Supreme Court · 1923