O.W. Kerr Co. v. Corry
| Decision Date | 06 January 1914 |
| Docket Number | 2024. |
| Parties | O. W. KERR CO. v. CORRY. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Seventh Circuit |
Plaintiff in error, termed 'defendant' herein, a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the state of Minnesota, claiming to have an option to purchase a large tract of land, approximately 150,000 acres, situate in the province of Saskatchewan, Canada, applied to defendant in error, herein designated as 'plaintiff,' to procure a purchaser for said tract of land upon certain terms set out in the complaint; one of the conditions being that such purchaser should agree to give to defendant an option to repurchase the same at an advance of not to exceed $50,000 over what such purchaser may have invested in said lands within the life of the original contract. In case the purchaser was secured, defendant agreed to pay to plaintiff a sum of money equal to the difference between $50,000 and the sum the purchaser would agree to reconvey for. A purchaser was secured by plaintiff, who agreed to resell to defendant for the sum of $37,500, whereby, it is alleged in the original proceeding, defendant became liable to pay plaintiff the difference of $12,500, for which he brought suit in the circuit court of Dane county, state of Wisconsin. The cause was removed to the United States Circuit Court for the Western District of Wisconsin. Thereafter, and at the opening of the trial, plaintiff obtained leave to and did amend his complaint by inserting a clause to the effect that defendant in its contract for the securing of a purchaser by him above set out, which was not reduced to writing, had promised and agreed to pay to plaintiff, in addition to the sum ascertained as above stated, the sum of $5,000 in any event whereby, the amended complaint charges, the defendant became liable to pay to plaintiff the sum of $17,500. Defendant by answer denied the material allegations of the complaint. On the trial the court ruled out the item of $12,500. Whereupon the jury rendered a verdict against defendant in favor of plaintiff for $5,000 upon which verdict the court entered judgment. This cause is now before us on writ of error to reverse such judgment.
Errors assigned are: (1) That the court erred in permitting the complaint to be amended; (2) that the court erred in overruling defendant's objections to certain questions put by plaintiff's attorney to defendant's witness Owen on cross-examination; (3) that the court erred in sustaining plaintiff's objections to questions put by defendant to its own witness Owen on redirect examination; (4) that the court erred in sustaining plaintiff's objections to questions put by defendant to its own witness Kerr on direct and on surrebuttal examination; (5) that the court erred in overruling defendant's objections to the argument of plaintiff's counsel; (6) that prejudicial error occurred in certain questions put by plaintiff's counsel to plaintiff himself and to plaintiff's witness Currier on their direct examination; (7) that prejudicial error occurred in the asking of several questions put by plaintiff's counsel to defendant's witness Owen on cross-examination.
Objection was made and sustained to each of these last-named questions recited under division 7, except one, to which no answer was given. Further facts are stated in the opinion.
John B. Sanborn and Chauncey E. Blake, both of Madison, Wis., and W. A. Koon, of Minneapolis, Minn., for plaintiff in error.
Samuel T. Swansen, of Madison, Wis., Paul D. Carpenter, of Milwaukee, Wis., and T. C. Richmond and R. W. Jackson, both of Madison, Wis., for defendant in error.
Before BAKER, SEAMAN, and KOHLSAAT, Circuit Judges.
KOHLSAAT Circuit Judge (after stating the facts as above).
For plaintiff it is...
To continue reading
Request your trial