
    Tyner v. Sexton & Son.
    Tax sabe : combination of bidders : evidence.
    
      Appeal from Dallas Dishriet Oowrt.
    
    Thursday, June 6.
    This is an action in equity to set aside the defendants’ tax title to a certain described eighty acres of land. One of the grounds upon which the relief is asked is that there was an illegal combination at the sale to prevent competition. The court decreed that the treasurer’s deed be set aside, and that the plaintiff’s title be quieted. The defendants appeal.
    
      Bm'croft, Given & Drabelle, for appellants.
    
      Oallveri, Maey & Smith, for appellee.
   Day, J.

The evidence is conflicting. We think, however, that it establishes by a fair preponderance the existence of an agreement at the sale, upon the part of the bidders, not to bid against each other, and that Warford, who bid in the land as agent of defendants, wasa party to such combination. It is true Warford testifies that he knew nothing of such a combination, but the facts established by the other witnesses are, we think, inconsistent with such statement. The proof brings the .case within the principle of Kerwer v. Allen, 31 Iowa, 578.

It is not our practice to review fully the evidence in cases involving only questions of fact. The advantages to be derived from such a course would not be commensurate with the space which our opinions would occupy in the reports.

We are of opinion that the judgment of the court below should be

Affirmed.  