Elsbarg v. Myrman

43 N.W. 572, 41 Minn. 541, 1889 Minn. LEXIS 412
Supreme Court of Minnesota·Decided November 1, 1889·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

By the Court.

We are of opinion that the verdict in this case was justified by the evidence, and we see no reason for supposing that the amount of it was purély arbitrary, as contended by appellants. It is entirely reconcilable with the evidence and the law as given by the trial judge upon substantially the grounds suggested in respondent’s brief. The receipt given by plaintiff to Shepard & Co., being a mere acknowledgment of payment, was subject to parol explanation or contradiction, and there was ample evidence to justify the jury in finding that there was no settlement of plaintiff’s claim, but that the receipt was merely given to enable him to obtain the money in the hands of Shepard & Co. belonging to defendants. Morris v. St. Paul & Chicago Ry. Co., 21 Minn. 91.

Order affirmed.

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

Elsbarg v. Myrman, 43 N.W. 572, 41 Minn. 541, 1889 Minn. LEXIS 412 (Mich. 1889).

43 N.W. 572 (Elsbarg v. Myrman) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Schmitt v. Bethea
82 So. 817 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1919)