Barnum v. Chamberlain Land & Loan Co.
South Dakota Supreme Court
Appeal f-rom ■Circuit Court, Tripp County. Hon. William WILLIAMSON, Judge. Action by E.. L- Barnum and -another, as co-partners, against the Chamberlain- Land and Loan Company, to recover a commission on a land sale. From a judgment for defendant entered upon a directed verdict, plaintiffs appeal. No exception to the direction of the verdict was taken, and error in the charge of the count cannot be considered in the absence of an exception.
Read the full summary
Appeal f-rom ■Circuit Court, Tripp County. Hon. William WILLIAMSON, Judge. Action by E.. L- Barnum and -another, as co-partners, against the Chamberlain- Land and Loan Company, to recover a commission on a land sale. From a judgment for defendant entered upon a directed verdict, plaintiffs appeal. No exception to the direction of the verdict was taken, and error in the charge of the count cannot be considered in the absence of an exception. Peterson v. Siglinger, 3 S. D., 255. Code Civ. Proc. Section 463, does not dispense with the necessity of taking an exception to the action of the count…
1Opinion of the CourtPollen, J.
Action to recover balance claimed to be due as commission on sale of .real property:
At the close of Appellant’s evidence, the court directed a verdict for defendant. This action on the part of the court is assigned as error, but appellant failed -to take any exception thereto at the trial, and it is contended by respondent -that, because of the absence of such exception, the said error, if any, is not reviewable by this court; and, in support of such contention, cites the following cases: Peterson v. Siglinger, 3 S. D. 255, 52 N. W. 1062; Beckwith v. Dierks Lumber & Coal Co., 75 Neb. 349, 106…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Holum v. Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1891
- Kirch v. DaviesWisconsin Supreme Court · 1882
- Evans v. Hughes CountySouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1892
- De Lendrecie v. PeckNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1891
- Beebe v. Minneapolis, St. Paul & Sault Ste. Marie Railway Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1908
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Inlagen v. Town of GarySouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1914
- Bailey v. Security Ins.Oregon Supreme Court · 1921
- Rodman v. RodmanSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1928