Thomas,  181  Iowa  700.  See,  also,  Ross  v.  Bolte,  165  Iowa  499,
508 ;  having  v.  Wagner,  175  Iowa  198,  201 ;  Sutton  v.  Oreiner',
177  Iowa  532,  535;  Remhe  v.  Ferguson,  183  Iowa  29,  37;
Edwards  v.  Foley,  187  Iowa  5,  8;  Hogan  v.  McComhs  Bros.,
190  Iowa  650.  Many  other  cases  might  be  cited  on  this  point,
some  of  which  are  cited  in  the  cases  above.  In  the  Hetland
case,  supra,  we  quoted  with  approval  from  another  case,  that
the  rule  that  no  one  is  liable  for  an  expression  of  an  opin-
ion is  applicable  only  when  the  opinion  stands  by  itself,  as
a  distinct  thing.  As  said,  there  are  representations  other
than  the  statement  as  to  value.  The  question  has  been  be-
fore us  many  times,  and  we  shall  not  again  review  the  cases
under  which  plaintiff  was  entitled  to  go  to  the  jury  on  this
question.  To  sustain  our  conclusion,  see  cases  last  above  cited,
and  Hess  v.  McCardell,  182  Iowa  1121,  1126 ;  Sh^dtlefield  v.  Neil,
163  Iowa  470;  Christeiisen  v.  Jauron,  (Iowa)  174  N.  W.  499
(not  officially  reported) ;  RUexj  v.  Bell,  120  Iowa  618,  626.  The
foregoing  are  the  later  cases  on  the  subject.
