From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Simerman v. Hackenkamp

Supreme Court of Minnesota
Jun 21, 1929
225 N.W. 915 (Minn. 1929)

Opinion

No. 27,542.

June 21, 1929.

Case followed.

Decision controlled by Simerman v. Habisch, 178 Minn. 15, 225 N.W. 913, opinion filed herewith.

Action in the district court for McLeod county by the receiver of the United Petroleum Company, Inc. to recover on a promissory note for $300 executed by the defendant. There was a verdict for defendant, and plaintiff appealed from the judgment, Tifft, J. entered pursuant thereto. Affirmed, following Simerman v. Habisch, 178 Minn. 15, 225 N.W. 913.

Erling Swenson, for appellant.

P. W. Morrison, for respondent.



After verdict for defendant, plaintiff moved for judgment notwithstanding. That motion was denied and judgment entered for defendant, from which plaintiff appeals. The case was argued and submitted with Simerman v. Habisch, 178 Minn. 15, 225 N.W. 913, opinion in which is filed herewith, and is so similar on its facts as to be controlled by that decision. Defendant's testimony was that he signed what later appeared to be the promissory note in suit upon the representation and believing that he was signing a paper only for the purpose of giving the stock salesmen his name and address.

Judgment affirmed.


Summaries of

Simerman v. Hackenkamp

Supreme Court of Minnesota
Jun 21, 1929
225 N.W. 915 (Minn. 1929)
Case details for

Simerman v. Hackenkamp

Case Details

Full title:GEORGE A. SIMERMAN v. JOSEPH HACKENKAMP

Court:Supreme Court of Minnesota

Date published: Jun 21, 1929

Citations

225 N.W. 915 (Minn. 1929)
225 N.W. 915

Citing Cases

Wismo Company v. Martin

The finding by the jury of fraud is approved by the court, and it is not for us to interfere with it. And so…