Case Name: M. M. SMITH v. THOMAS CORCORAN
Court: Minnesota Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Minnesota
Decision Date: 1900-10-18
Citations: 81 Minn. 219
Docket Number: Nos. 12,329—(39)
Parties: M. M. SMITH v. THOMAS CORCORAN.
Judges: 
Reporter: Minnesota Reports
Volume: 81
Pages: 219–220

Head Matter:
M. M. SMITH v. THOMAS CORCORAN.
October 18, 1900.
Nos. 12,329—(39).
Verdict — Evidence.
Held, that there was evidence sufficient to support the verdict.
Action-in the district court for Waseca county to recover $132 for goods sold and delivered. The case was tried before Buckham, J., and a jury, which rendered a verdict in favor of plaintiff for $115. From an order denying a motion for a new trial, defendant appealed.
Affirmed.
John Mooncm and A. J. O’Grady, for appellant.
P. McGovern, for respondent.
Reported in 83 N. W. 835.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
This action was brought to collect a balance due on an account for goods, wares, and merchandise sold by plaintiff ta defendant; it being admitted by both parties that the property sold consisted largely of intoxicating liquors. The defense was that the defendant at the time of such sales was an habitual drunkard. This was the main issue submitted to the jury, and the verdict was for the plaintiff. There was evidence to sustain it, and, under the well-known rule, the order appealed from, which denied defendant's motion for a new trial, must be, and hereby is, affirmed.