Holland Furnace Company v. Spinnenweber

18 S.W.2d 1020, 179 Ark. 1014, 1929 Ark. LEXIS 176
CourtSupreme Court of Arkansas
DecidedJuly 8, 1929
StatusPublished

This text of 18 S.W.2d 1020 (Holland Furnace Company v. Spinnenweber) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Arkansas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Holland Furnace Company v. Spinnenweber, 18 S.W.2d 1020, 179 Ark. 1014, 1929 Ark. LEXIS 176 (Ark. 1929).

Opinion

Kirby, J.

This suit was brought in the justice court upon a claim for commission for making the sale of a furnace for appellant company, and, upon appeal to the circuit court, where the-complaint was amended, judgment was rendered for appellee for $52, the amount claimed, from which the appeal is prosecuted.

Appellant denied having ever made any agreement with appellee for payment of commissions upon sales made by him or any of its agents, and any indebtedness to appellee on that’ account.

There is a lot of testimony in- the record which it would serve no useful purpose to review, since the majority of the court has concluded that the testimony.was sufficient to support the judgment.

Each of the parties asked for a directed verdict and no other instructions, and the court directed a verdict in favor of the appellee. There being some substantial testimony to support it, as the majority holds, it will not be disturbed here. St. L. S. W. Ry. Co. v. Mulkey, 100 Ark. 71, 139 S. W. 643.

The judgment is accordingly affirmed.

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

Related

St. Louis Southwestern Railway Co. v. Mulkey
139 S.W. 643 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1911)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
18 S.W.2d 1020, 179 Ark. 1014, 1929 Ark. LEXIS 176, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/holland-furnace-company-v-spinnenweber-ark-1929.