Post v. Roberts

106 N.W. 1099, 127 Wis. 605, 1906 Wisc. LEXIS 198
Wisconsin Supreme Court·Decided March 20, 1906·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Dodge, J.

A careful examination of the evidence fails to disclose any clear preponderance against the material findings of fact. Indeed, the only serious question is as to whether plaintiffs were so informed of the deficiency in the quantity of the land before purchasing that they cannot be deemed to have relied upon defendant’s statement in that'respect. On this, however, there is considerable conflict of evidence, and certain maps referred to therein present upon the trial below are not brought here in the bill of exceptions. Such maps may have served to strongly support the findings and, in their absence, such must be presumed to have been their effect. If they tended to the contrary, appellant should have incorporated them in the bill of exceptions. Independently of this subject, however, the misrepresentations as to the quantity of clay loam and of cultivated lands are both material and are adequately proved.

By the Court. — Judgment affirmed.

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

Post v. Roberts, 106 N.W. 1099, 127 Wis. 605, 1906 Wisc. LEXIS 198 (Wis. 1906).

106 N.W. 1099 (Post v. Roberts) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Darlington v. J. L. Gates Land Co.
138 N.W. 72 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1913)
Patterson v. Cappon
109 N.W. 103 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1906)