¶1Action by a real estate agent to-recover a commission. The first trial of the canse resulted in a verdict for plaintiff which the court set aside on motions for new trial and in arrest of judgment and plaintiff appealed to this court. We affirmed the judgment, holding that no error was committed in granting a new trial (119 Mo. App. 231). At the second trial, verdict and judgment were for defendant and plaintiff again appealed. We do not find any material difference in the evidentiary facts adduced at the two trials and, since the law of the case was fully discussed and determined in our former opinion, and we find that the rules and principles announced were followed and applied at the second trial, we perceive no good reason for retraveling ground once thoroughly covered. Accordingly, the judgment is affirmed.
132 Mo. App. 721
Young v. Ruhweddel
Decided October 15, 1908
Missouri Court of Appeals · decided 1908-10-15
<p>APPELLATE PRACTICE: Former Appeal: Affirmation. Where the trial court on a second trial follows the rules and principles announced in the opinion ordering such trial, the judgment will he affirmed.</p>
Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently June 1914
1 state decisions
Relies on Young v. Ruhwedel
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Affirmed · Decided 1908-10-15
View the full empirical analysis of this case →