TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Jamesgaard v. Bayers

OSCAR B. JAMESGAARD v. P. C. BAYERS AND ANOTHER

Jamesgaard v. Bayers, 180 N.W. 927 (Minn. 1921)
Download
Format
Include

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

Court
Supreme Court of Minnesota · State Highest Courts
Decided
January 21, 1921
Docket
No. 21,909
Judges
Ctjriam
Citations
180 N.W. 927148 Minn. 4761921 Minn. LEXIS 567
Disposition
Affirmed.
Headnotes
Exchange of property. Action to rescind contract for exchange, of properties because of fraudulent representations. Court found in favor of defendants and ordered judgment for them. Appeal from judgment, entered after denial of new trial. Held: The evidence fully supports the conclusion that the transaction was free from fraud. [Reporter.]
Summary
Action in the district court for Ramsey county to rescind a contract for exchange of real estate because of fraudulent representations. The answer alleged that prior to the commencement of the action defendants, in good faith, being in -possession of the property, placed valuable improvements thereon of the reasonable value of $3,000. The case was tried before Olin B. Lewis, J., who made findings and ordered judgment in favor of defendants dismissing the action. Plaintiff’s motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict or for a new trial, was denied. Prom the judgment entered pursuant to the order for judgment, plaintiff appealed.

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

Opinion of the Court — Ctjriam

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

'Pee Ctjriam.

Action to rescind a contract for the exchange of real properties on the ground of fraudulent representations by defendant. The trial was before the court without a jury, and among other things the court found as á fact that no fraudulent representations were made by defendant, and as conclusions of law ordered judgment for defendant. Plaintiff appealed from the judgment entered after an order denying a new trial. The only question presented is whether the findings of the court in the respect stated are sustained by the evidence. After a careful reading of the record we answer the question in the affirmative; the evidence fully supports the conclusion that the transaction was free from fraud or misrepresentation. The assignment of error challenging a ruling of the trial court in the exclusion -of evidence is without merit.

Judgment affirmed.

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