Case Name: OSCAR B. JAMESGAARD v. P. C. BAYERS AND ANOTHER
Court: Minnesota Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Minnesota
Decision Date: 1921-01-21
Citations: 148 Minn. 476
Docket Number: No. 21,909
Parties: OSCAR B. JAMESGAARD v. P. C. BAYERS AND ANOTHER.
Judges: 
Reporter: Minnesota Reports
Volume: 148
Pages: 476–477

Head Matter:
OSCAR B. JAMESGAARD v. P. C. BAYERS AND ANOTHER.
January 21, 1921.
No. 21,909.
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.]
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.
Affirmed.
C. B. Smith, for appellant.
Selover, Schulte & Mansfield, for respondents.
Reported in 180 N. W. 927.

Opinion:
'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.