Case ID: ind-app_16/html/0697-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Lotz, C. J. Comstook, C. J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Steading v. Strouse et al.
    [No. 2,046.
    Filed Nov. 24, 1896.
    Rehearing denied Jan. 29, 1897.]
    From the Marion Superior Court,
    
      Affirmed.
    
    
      Upton J. Hammond and Edwin St. George Rogers, for appellant,
    
      J. W. Holtzman and J. M. Leathers, for appellees.
   Lotz, C. J.

The appellees sued the appellant to recover commissions on the sale of real estate, and recovered judgment in the court below. The only error assigned in this court is the overruling of the motion for a new trial. It is insisted that the finding is contrary to the law and not supported by sufficient evidence. The appellant asserts that there was no evidence whatever to support the finding. We have given the evidence a careful consideration and find that there is some testimony tending to support the finding. It is true that such testimony is meager and unsatisfactory," but, under the familiar rule, this court will not weigh the evidence under such circumstances; the cause must, therefore, be affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.

On Petition for Rehearing.

Comstook, C. J.

We have carefully considered the argument of the learned counsel on petition for rehearing, and have examined the questions presented by the record.

In our opinion, the conclusion reached by the court, as announced by Lotz, C. J., is correct.

The petition for rehearing is, therefore, overruled.