Steading v. Strouse

Indiana Court of Appeals

Steading v. Strouse

45 N.E. 193, 16 Ind. App. 697, 1896 Ind. App. LEXIS 416

CourtIndiana Court of Appeals

DecidedNovember 24, 1896

DocketNo. 2,046

StatusPublished

This text of 45 N.E. 193 (Steading v. Strouse) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Indiana Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Steading v. Strouse, 45 N.E. 193, 16 Ind. App. 697, 1896 Ind. App. LEXIS 416 (Ind. Ct. App. 1896).

Pincite

Opinions

Lotz, C. J.

The appellees sued the appellant to recover commissions on the sale of real estate, and recovered judgment in the court below. The only error assigned in this court is the overruling of the motion for a new trial. It is insisted that the finding is contrary to [698]*698the law and not supported by sufficient evidence. The appellant asserts that there was no evidence whatever to support the finding. We have given the evidence a careful consideration and find that there is some testimony tending to support the finding. It is true that such testimony is meager and unsatisfactory," but, under the familiar rule, this court will not weigh the evidence under such circumstances; the cause must, therefore, be affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Lotz, C. J.

The appellees sued the appellant to recover commissions on the sale of real estate, and recovered judgment in the court below. The only error assigned in this court is the overruling of the motion for a new trial. It is insisted that the finding is contrary to [698]*698the law and not supported by sufficient evidence. The appellant asserts that there was no evidence whatever to support the finding. We have given the evidence a careful consideration and find that there is some testimony tending to support the finding. It is true that such testimony is meager and unsatisfactory," but, under the familiar rule, this court will not weigh the evidence under such circumstances; the cause must, therefore, be affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

45 N.E. 193, 16 Ind. App. 697, 1896 Ind. App. LEXIS 416, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/steading-v-strouse-indctapp-1896.