Gamble-Robinson Commission Co. v. Whitaker
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Action for conversion. After the former appeal, reported in 116 Minn. 79, 133 N. W. 167, the case was tried before Hallam, J., who directed the jury that if plaintiff was entitled to recover it was entitled to recover $1080, and interest thereon. The jury returned a verdict in favor of plaintiff. From an order denying their motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict or for a new trial, defendants appealed.
1Per curiam
This action has been before the court on two former appeals. 111 Minn. 452, 127 N. W. 448; 116 Minn. 79, 133 N. W. 167. The facts are there fully stated, and a restatement is deemed unnecessary. The questions presented on the different trials were practically the same, namely: (1) Whether the defendants were joint purchasers of the eggs, or whether the Peifer Company was their agent in the purchase; and (2) whether if not so purchased, defendants were bona fide holders of the warehouse receipt.
Our examination of the record leads to the conclusion that these questions were properly submitted…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Ammon v. Gamble-Robinson Commission Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1910
- Gamble-Robinson Commission Co. v. WhitakerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1911