
    John F. Heckman vs. Marie L. Champlin
    No.41842
    April 29, 1918
    For Plaintiff: Edward C. Stiness and Daniel H. Morrissey.
    Fo.r Defendant: Quinn & Kernan.
   DORAN, J.

The new testimony might contradict defendant’s agent in some respects, otherwise it is mainly cumulative. It is claimed that plaintiff’s servants cannot be right. It is true one would not expect a broker to advance more than the expense of getting out the lumber and would expect that the entire selling price would be greater than the expense of getting the lumber 'out, but the Court is not in a position to demonstrate where the accounts are wrong.

Petition for new trial denied.  