Espenlaub v. Sheetz

Citation200 N.E. 717,102 Ind.App. 368
Decision Date31 March 1936
Docket NumberNo. 15177.,15177.
PartiesESPENLAUB v. SHEETZ.
CourtIndiana Appellate Court

102 Ind.App. 368
200 N.E. 717

ESPENLAUB
v.
SHEETZ.

No. 15177.

Appellate Court of Indiana, in Banc.

March 31, 1936.


Appeal from Probate Court, Vanderburgh County; Albert J. Veneman, Judge.

Action by Elmer L. Sheetz against George H. Espenlaub. From a judgment for plaintiff and an order refusing a new trial, defendant appeals.

Affirmed.


W. C. Clippinger, of Evansville, for appellant.

Craig & Mitchell, of Evansville, for appellee.


BRIDWELL, Judge.

Appellee brought this action against appellant to recover an amount alleged to be due him on account of appellant having repudiated and breached a contract made between them whereby appellee, as agent of appellant, agreed to sell a used automobile owned by appellant, appellee to receive for his services in so doing an amount equal to any excess of $300, which appellee might procure from a purchaser of said automobile.

The complaint alleges, among other things, the making of said contract; that appellee procured a purchaser who was ready, able, and willing to purchase said automobile for $400; that appellant refused to transfer and convey said automobile to the purchaser so procured, and breached the contract, although appellee had done and performed all things by him to be performed under the agreement; that appellee had repeatedly demanded payment of the amount of $100, due him under the contract, and that appellant has failed and refused to pay the same, or any part thereof. The complaint was answered by general denial, and, thereafter, the cause was submitted to the court for trial. Upon appellant's request, the court made a special finding of facts, and stated its conclusions of law thereon. The special finding is as follows: (1) “That on or about the 28th day of January, 1931, the defendant, George H. Espenlaub, and the plaintiff, Elmer L. Sheetz, entered into a verbal contract whereby the said defendant contracted and engaged with the plaintiff, that the plaintiff procure a purchaser for one Studebaker President Eight automobile, owned by the defendant; (2) that by virtue of said contract, the plaintiff was to sell the said automobile for cash, and was to retain or receive, as and for his compensation for effecting such sale, such part of the purchase price therefor as exceeded the sum of Three Hundred Dollars ($300), which latter sum was to be received by the defendant in consideration of his transfer and sale of said automobile to the purchaser to be secured by the plaintiff under the said contract; (3) that the...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT