Case ID: kan_110/html/0462-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Poster, J.:", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

No. 23,490.
    I. C. Rosa and P. J. Upp, Appellees, v. W. J. Randall, Appellant.
    
    SYLLABUS BY THE COURT.
    
      Agency — Commissions—Findings Sustained by Sufficient Evidence. Record examined and held to show that the special findings of the jury in favor of plaintiffs and against the defendant are sustained by sufficient evidence and compel an affirmance of the judgment.
    Appeal from Ford district court; Littleton M. Day, judge.
    Opinion filed February 11, 1922.
    
    Affirmed.
    
      A. J. Stevens, of Alva, Okla., for the appellant.
    
      Albert Watkins, and Arthur C. Scales, both of Dodge City, for the appellees.
   The opinion of the court was delivered by

Poster, J.:

The plaintiffs sued to recover a commission for services as agents of defendant in the exchange of his farm for other real estate. The jury returned a verdict for plaintiffs; judgment was rendered; defendant’s motion for a new trial was overruled; and he appeals.

In his answer he denied that plaintiffs were his agents; denied that he had listed his property with them, and as a further defense alleged that plaintiffs acted as the agents of and were paid a commission by the other party in the trade. A purported abstraot sets forth the pleadings in full (which could have been abstracted in a short paragraph); the evidence most favorable to defendant’s contentions, with the questions and answers, when the narrative form should have been employed. It contains no reference to the controlling fact that the jury, in answer to special questions submitted by plaintiffs, and also by defendant, found all the facts in favor of 'plaintiffs and against the defendant.

Every finding is abundantly sustained by evidence, and the case should not have been appealed.

Judgment affirmed.