Advance-Rumely Thresher. Co. v. Rohr

Opinion by

Stadteeld, J.,

This was an action of replevin originally brought against Samuel B. Bohr to recover possession of a certain threshing machine and equipment. Subsequently, Walter M. Rohr, son of the original defendant, claiming to be the lawful owner of said machine was, on petition, permitted to intervene as party defendant.

The facts leading up to this litigation are correctly set forth in the opinion of the lower court, by Keller, P. J., on the first trial of this case, as follows: “On June 3, 1926, plaintiff entered into a written agreement with Walter M. Rohr, the intervening…