History
  • No items yet
midpage
Simerman v. Hackenkamp
178 Minn. 19
Minn.
1929
Check Treatment

1 Reported in 225 N.W. 915. After verdict for defendant, plaintiff moved for judgment notwithstanding. That motion was denied and judgment entered for defendant, from which plaintiff appeals. The case was argued and submitted with Simerman v. Habisch, 178 Minn. 15,225 N.W. 913, opinion in which is filed herewith, and is so similar on its facts as to be controlled by that decision. Defendant's testimony was that he signed what later appeared to be the promissory note in *Page 20 suit upon the representation and believing that he was signing a paper only for the purpose of giving the stock salesmen his name and address.

Judgment affirmed.

Case Details

Case Name: Simerman v. Hackenkamp
Court Name: Supreme Court of Minnesota
Date Published: Jun 21, 1929
Citation: 178 Minn. 19
Docket Number: No. 27,542.
Court Abbreviation: Minn.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.