Craig v. Sylvester

Supreme Court of Iowa

Craig v. Sylvester

69 N.W. 1030, 100 Iowa 753

DecidedJanuary 25, 1897

StatusPublished

This text of 69 N.W. 1030 (Craig v. Sylvester) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Iowa primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Craig v. Sylvester, 69 N.W. 1030, 100 Iowa 753 (iowa 1897).

Pincite

Opinion

Kinne, C. J.

~I. It is claimed that the price of the stone sills was paid by the use of defe idant’s sulky. As to this, the evidence was conflicting, and the jury may well have found that these were not the sills which were paid for by the use of the sulky. -' ' - , -

[754]*754II. The jury found specially that all the work done by plaintiff for the defendant was under one contract, which was for one hundred dollars, and that but thirty-seven dollars was paid thereon. There was evidence sufficient to sustain these findings. The jury also found that it did not cost the defendant anything to complete the work Which plaintiff had agreed to do. From both abstracts presented, it is difficult to determine the real facts as to certain claims of the parties. We discover no reason for interfering with the judgment. The motions will be overruled. — Affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Kinne, C. J.

~I. It is claimed that the price of the stone sills was paid by the use of defe idant’s sulky. As to this, the evidence was conflicting, and the jury may well have found that these were not the sills which were paid for by the use of the sulky. -' ' - , -

[754]*754II. The jury found specially that all the work done by plaintiff for the defendant was under one contract, which was for one hundred dollars, and that but thirty-seven dollars was paid thereon. There was evidence sufficient to sustain these findings. The jury also found that it did not cost the defendant anything to complete the work Which plaintiff had agreed to do. From both abstracts presented, it is difficult to determine the real facts as to certain claims of the parties. We discover no reason for interfering with the judgment. The motions will be overruled. — Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

69 N.W. 1030, 100 Iowa 753, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/craig-v-sylvester-iowa-1897.