Case Name: POND & HASEY COMPANY v. C. M. WINSLOW and Another
Court: Minnesota Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Minnesota
Decision Date: 1906-04-20
Citations: 97 Minn. 537
Docket Number: Nos. 14,671—(56)
Parties: POND & HASEY COMPANY v. C. M. WINSLOW and Another.
Judges: 
Reporter: Minnesota Reports
Volume: 97
Pages: 537–538

Head Matter:
POND & HASEY COMPANY v. C. M. WINSLOW and Another.
April 20, 1906.
Nos. 14,671—(56).
Appeal by defendants from an order of the municipal court of Minneapolis, Waite, J., denying a motion for a new trial, after a trial and findings in favor of plaintiff for $106.53.
Affirmed.
James D. Shearer and BeMen, Jamison & Shearer, for appellants.
Jay W. Grane, for respondent.
Reported in 106 N. W. 1133.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
The principal question in this ease is whether the findings of the trial court are sustained by the evidence. The ruling excluding certain evidence offered by defendants was not error. The evidence upon the issue whether the pur chase of the boiler, the value of which plaintiff seeks to recover, was absolute or conditional, was conflicting, presenting a question of fact for the trial court. The findings are not clearly against the evidence and must be sustained1.
Order affirmed.