Case ID: idaho_36/html/0417-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "LEE, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

(December 19, 1922.)
    F. A. HECKER, Respondent, v. W. O. JOHNSON, alias JOHNSON MOTOR COMPANY, Appellant.
    [211 Pac. 445.]
    Appeal and Error — No Appearance — Pule 4S — Judgment Affirmed.
    1. Where a cause on the calendar is reached for hearing and neither side has submitted a brief or is represented by counsel, under Eule 48 this court may, in its discretion, either dismiss the cause, which results in an affirmance of the judgment below, or examine the record for fundamental error and render its judgment on the merits.
    2. Beeord examined and held sufficient to support the judgment.
    APPEAL from the District Court of the Ninth Judicial District, for Bonneville County. Hon. James G. Gwinn, Judge.
    Action for damages. From judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals.
    
      Affirmed.
    
    
      Mackenzie & Ericksen, lor Respondent.
    Albangh & Talbott, for Appellant.
   LEE, J.

This action was to recover damages alleged to have been sustained by respondent on account of fraudulent representations made by appellant, upon two causes of action arising out of the same transaction.

Appellant demurred to the amended complaint, which demurrer was overruled, and he having failed to plead further, his default was entered. Thereafter the court heard and considered evidence offered on behalf of respondent in support of the allegations of the complaint. Findings of fact and conclusions of law were made and a judgment was entered thereon, from which judgment, as subsequently modified, this appeal is taken.

When the cause was reached for argument in this court, neither party appeared, and no briefs were filed. Upon this state of the record, and in accordance with Rule 48 of this court, the record has been examined to ascertain whether it is sufficient to support the judgment as entered. (Ellsworth v. Hill, 34 Ida. 359, 200 Pac. 1067; Hoffman v. Payette Heights Irr. Dist., 35 Ida. 375, 205 Pac. 515.) The record does not diselose any fundamental errors in the trial below, and the judgment is affirmed, with costs to respondent.

Rice, C. J., and Budge, McCarthy and Dunn, JJ., concur.