Goranson v. Brady-Mcgowan Co.

— In appellant’s suit for collection of an item for the Pocatello Title and Abstract Company, respondent urged as one of his defenses, it being unnecessary by reason of the conclusion reached herein to consider the other, that appellant was conducting a collection agency and had not complied with C. S., chap. 114.

Both sides moved for a directed verdict; hence the question is whether there is evidence to sustain the conclusion of the trial court. (McCall v. First National Bank, 47 Ida. 519, 277 Pac. 562.) The evidence shows without real conflict that the account was assigned for collection…