Schoof v. Hoagland

183 N.W. 132, 44 S.D. 184, 1921 S.D. LEXIS 85
South Dakota Supreme Court·Decided June 2, 1921·No. File No. 4822·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinions

M-c-CO'Y, J.

Action to recover commissions on alleged sale of real estate. Verdict for defendant. From an order granting a new trial the defendant appeals.

The motion for new trial, among other things, was based on the insufficiency of the evidence to sustain the verdict. We are of the view that the evidence to sustain the verdict was of such a conflicting nature that different persons might reasonably have drawn different conclusions therefrom. Under such circumstances the order granling a new trial should not be reversed.

Finding no error in (he record, the order appealed from is affirmed.

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

Schoof v. Hoagland, 183 N.W. 132, 44 S.D. 184, 1921 S.D. LEXIS 85 (S.D. 1921).

183 N.W. 132 (Schoof v. Hoagland) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Security State Bank v. Bank of Centerville
193 N.W. 670 (South Dakota Supreme Court, 1923)