TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Pugh v. Dexheimer

Pugh v. Dexheimer, 185 N.W. 299 (S.D. 1921)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
South Dakota Supreme Court · State Highest Courts
Decided
November 22, 1921
Docket
No. File No. 4957
Judges
Gates, McCo
Citations
185 N.W. 29945 S.D. 551921 S.D. LEXIS 177
Disposition
Affirmed.
Headnotes
Evidence — Auction Sale, Purchase of Horse At, Returned to Auction Clerk — Conversation With Clerk Re Rescission of Sale, Whether Clerk Vendor’s Agent. •' • ■ Where defendant purchased from plaintiff at auction sale" a mare, not having paid purchase price, and the animal being ■ returned next day when defendant, not finding vendor, talked with one who acted as clerk at the sale; held, that a conversation between defendant and said person, concerning the sale on the previous day was incompetent; such person not being vendor’s agent at that time for purpose of a notice of rescission of the sale contract. .McCoy, J., not sitting.
Summary
Appeal from Circuit Court, Hanson County. Hon. Frank B. Smith, Judge. Action by Oscar Pugh, against Carl P. Dexheimer, to recover price of plaintiff’s mare sold to defendant at an auction sale. From1 a judgment for plaintiff, and from an order denying a new trial, defendant appeals.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Gates

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

GATES, J.

Defendant’bought a mare from plaintiff at auction sale, which he took home without having' paid the purchase price. On the next day he took the mare to Spencer, but, not finding the vendor, he talked with the person who had acted as clerk of the sale. He then left the mare with the town marshal. This action was brought to recover the purchase price. Judgment for plaintiff. New trial denied. Defendant appeals..

Defendant was not peimitted to relate the conversation he had with the person who had acted as clerk of the sale on the previous day. The principal assignments of error are based upon the theory that the person who acted as clerk of the sale thereby became the agent of the vendor for the purpose of notice of a rescission of the contract. We find no foundation in law for the theory, nor anything of fact in the record justifying it. The conversation that took place between them on the day after the sale and in the absence of plaintiff was plainly incompetent.

The judgment and order appealed from are affirmed.

McCO’Y, J., not sitting.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 0 cases

No case in this database cites this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list