Grimes v. Wilson

Decision Date18 November 1911
Docket NumberCase Number: 1202
PartiesGRIMES v. WILSON.
CourtOklahoma Supreme Court
Syllabus

¶0 1. APPEAL AND ERROR--Review--Sufficiency of Evidence. Where the evidence reasonably tends to support a verdict, it will not be disturbed on appeal.

2. EVIDENCE--Admissions. It is not error to admit in evidence the statement of a witness set out in a motion for continuance, where, in order to prevent a continuance, the opposite party admits that the witness, if present, would testify as stated in the motion.

Error from Comanche County Court; James H. Wolverton, Judge.

Action by W. E. Wilson against E. G. Grimes. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant brings error. Affirmed.

Hussey & Japp, for plaintiff in error

H. F. Tripp, for defendant in error

ROSSER, C.

¶1 This was a suit by defendant in error, W. E. Wilson, hereinafter called plaintiff, against plaintiff in error, E. G. Grimes, hereinafter called defendant, to recover certain commissions which Wilson claimed that Grimes owed him for selling a certain school land lease. There was a judgment for plaintiff, and defendant appeals. Defendant asks to have the case reversed upon the ground that the evidence shows that in making the contract he was only acting as the agent of his sister, who was the owner of the lease, and that he disclosed this fact to plaintiff at the time the contract was made. If the evidence does show this, defendant is right in his contention. (31 Cyc. 1563.)

¶2 It is admitted by all parties that the title to the lease was in defendant's sister, and plaintiff admits that the defendant told him at the time the lease was listed with him for sale that the lease was in his sister's name; but he further testified that defendant told him that the land was held by his sister for him, because he held one lease in his own name, and the territory of Oklahoma did not allow an individual to hold a lease on more than one quarter section. The statement of B. H. Howle, as contained in the motion for continuance, and which was read by the plaintiff at the trial, was to the same effect. It further appears from the evidence that the purchase price of the lease was sent by the purchaser from his home in Ohio to the defendant at Lawton, although the sister, who the defendant claims was the owner of the lease, lived in Nebraska at the time. The defendant did not testify that he ever sent the purchase money, or any part of it, to his sister. The sister, whom he claimed was the owner of the lease, did not testify in the case. The plaintiff wrote several letters to defendant's father with reference to the lease, as follows:

"Aug. 4, 1906. G. W. Grimes, Sterling, Neb.--Dear Sir: Those letters and papers have not as yet came, and the party has the money, and is getting anxious. I do not feel any need of this delay, so if possible hurry the matter up. Respectfully, W. E. Wilson.
"Walters, Okla., July 11, 1906. Mr. G. W. Grimes, Sterling, Neb.--Dear Sir: Please send the release to the Walters National Bank with instructions to send to you net $ 500.00. Everything is all right here now to close up the deal. Your son tells me that you are off the market on your deeded quarter. I would like to know your pleasure in the matter, as I have a buyer for the place. Hoping to hear from you soon, I remain, Respectfully, Wm. E. Wilson.
"Walters, Okla., June 21, 1906. Mr. G. W. Grimes, Sterling, Neb.--Dear Sir: Yours of the 16th at hand and contents noted. I will say the S.E. 1/4 is sold to C. B. Tracy. This you value at $ 500.00. Mr. Tracy will have an option of sixty days. He has placed $ 15.00 in the bank here subject to the proper papers. We will wait until Mr. Tracy gets all of his money here, that is the balance of the $ 500.00. I can sell the S.W. 1/4 in a few days I think. I will do my best on the other lands you mentioned. I will write you in time so you can get up the papers."

¶3 The plaintiff testified that he wrote to G. W. Grimes, the defendant's father, under the instructions of the defendant. Defendant's father testified that plaintiff wrote to him and requested payment of the commission, and told him that he (the plaintiff) hoped that he would not treat plaintiff as defendant had done. He did not produce this letter, but testified from recollection as to its contents. He was corroborated by another daughter, a sister of the defendant, as to the contents of the letter. He also testified that plaintiff made a verbal demand on him for the commission. Plaintiff denied writing the letter, and also the verbal demand. Defendant's father had other lands listed with plaintiff for sale. The defendant testified that he told plaintiff he would not take less than $ 600 net for the lease, and also told him that it belonged to his sister, but denied that he had ever told plaintiff his sister was holding it for him. There was some evidence that defendant had declined an offer of $ 515 for the land about the time it was listed with plaintiff. After the trade was made, the defendant went to plaintiff's office and offered him $ 65 in settlement. There was a conflict in the testimony as to whether the defendant, at the time he went to the office, told plaintiff that he had left $ 65 in the bank for him.

¶4 The court instructed the jury that if they found from the evidence that the defendant, at the time he listed the premises with the plaintiff for sale, disclosed to plaintiff that he was acting as the agent for his sister, and not on his own account, the defendant was not liable. No complaint is made as to the instructions of the court, and the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
8 cases
  • St. Louis & S. F. R. Co. v. Long
    • United States
    • Oklahoma Supreme Court
    • December 23, 1913
    ...114, 128 P. 137; Hampton v. Culberson, 29 Okla. 468, 118 P. 134; American W. & P. Co. v. Spear, 31 Okla. 22, 119 P. 586; Grimes v. Wilson, 30 Okla. 322, 120 P. 294; Federal Trust Co. v. Spurlock, 34 Okla. 644, 126 P. 805; Brissey v. Trotter, 34 Okla. 445, 125 P. 1119; Stringer v. Hart, 36 O......
  • Stekoll v. Lebow
    • United States
    • Oklahoma Supreme Court
    • March 28, 1922
    ...Okla. 540, 119 P. 1122; Stem v. Adams, 30 Okla. 101, 118 P. 382; Caddo National Bank v. Moore, 30 Okla. 148, 120 P. 1003; Grimes v. Wilson, 30 Okla. 322, 120 P. 294; Edwards v. Miller, 30 Okla. 442, 120 P. 996; Prescott v. Brown. 30 Okla. 428, 120 P. 991."Second. The misconduct of the jury ......
  • Gault v. Thurmond
    • United States
    • Oklahoma Supreme Court
    • November 18, 1913
    ...evidence reasonably tending to support such finding. Hobbs v. Smith, 27 Okla. 830, 115 P. 347, 34 L.R.A. (N.S.) 697; Grimes v. Wilson, 30 Okla. 322, 120 P. 294; Lynch et al. v. Halsell, 34 Okla. 307, 125 P. 725; Kennedy v. Pawnee Trust Co., 34 Okla. 140, 126 P. 548. Likewise, the court foun......
  • Sands v. David Bradley & Co.
    • United States
    • Oklahoma Supreme Court
    • January 7, 1913
    ... ... Armstrong, Bird & Co. v. Crump, 25 Okla. 452, 106 P. 855; Caddo Nat. Bank v. Moore, 30 Okla. 148, 120 P. 1003; Grimes v. Wilson, 30 Okla. 322, 120 P. 294; Prescott v. Brown, 30 Okla. 428, 120 P. 991; Edwards v. Miller, 30 Okla. 442, 120 P. 996; Allen v. Kenyon, 30 ... ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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