Rose v. Eggers
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from Crawford District Court. — Hon. Z. 'A. Church, Judge. Action in replevin resulted in a directed verdict for defendant and judgment thereon. The plaintiff appeals. — ■
1Opinion of the CourtLadd, J.
The parties hereto exchanged stallions about Eebruary 20, 1906, that of plaintiff being a Goldenberry coach, named “General;” the defendant’s, a pereheron, known as “Bedford.” They traded even, but subsequently plaintiff rued his bargain and brought this action to recover the possession of “General.” After the introduction of the evidence, the jury was directed to return a verdict for the defendant, >and the main question for our consideration is whether this was warranted by the record. The plaintiff alleged in the petition that he was induced to make the trade by defendant fraudulently…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- O'Brien v. Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1894
- Balue v. TaylorIndiana Supreme Court · 1894
- Dillon v. LeeSupreme Court of Iowa · 1899
- McCorkell v. KarhoffSupreme Court of Iowa · 1894
- National Improvement & Construction Co. v. MaikenSupreme Court of Iowa · 1897
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Lambertson v. National Investment & Finance Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1925
- First National Bank v. CookSupreme Court of Iowa · 1915
- St. George's Society v. SawyerSupreme Court of Iowa · 1927
- Cress v. IvensSupreme Court of Iowa · 1914
- Exchange State Bank v. BuckleySupreme Court of Iowa · 1923
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.