¶1(dissenting). I am not able to concur in the •majority opinion in this case. I think 'the evidence not only fails to support the verdict, but that circumstances, not questioned by either party, prove conclusively that plaintiff knew the land that was shown him in section 21 was no part of section 15. Upon the record before this court, the judgment appealed1 from ought toi be reversed, and the 'action dismissed at plaintiff’s cost.
41 S.D. 45
Barker v. Coats
Decided September 3, 1918
South Dakota Supreme Court · decided 1918-09-03
Circuit Court, Brown County. Hon. Thomas L. Boucic. Judge. Action by Arthur W. Barker, -against F. S. Coats, to recover a commission upon an exchange of lands. From' a judgment for plaintiff, and from, an order -denying a new trial, defendant appeals.
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Affirmed · Decided 1918-09-03
How this case has been cited
Cited by 4 later decisions — most recently December 1977
4 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
View the full empirical analysis of this case →