Beranek v. Gohr

Upon appeal the plaintiffs claim that the trial court erred in finding that an oral agreement was entered into by Ernst Gohr and Carl Gohr, in permitting the amendment to the counterclaim, and in finding that there was sufficient performance of the oral contract to overcome the statute of frauds, which was asserted as a defense.

As to the first claim of error, it is apparent that there was an oral agreement. There was a sharp dispute in the testimony as to the terms of the agreement, and the terms thereof were determined by the trial court from the evidence. It was judge of the credibility of…