Case ID: colo_71/html/0112-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Mr. Justice Denison", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

No. 10,162.
    Ownbey v. Silverstein.
    Decided February 6, 1922.
    Action for attorney fees. Judgment for plaintiff.
    
      Affirmed.
    
    
      On Application for Supersedeas.
    
    1. Appeajg and Eekok — Sufficient Evidence. When a case is reversed and retried upon tbe old record alone, tlie only error that can be considered upon another writ of error from this court is the sufficiency of the evidence.
    
      Error tó the District Court of the City and County of Denver, Hon. Charles C. Butler, Judge.
    
    Mr. B. F. Reed, Mr. Robert W. Steele, Jr., for plaintiff in error.
    Mr. G. Dexter Blount, Mr. Henry E. Lutz, for defendant in error.
    
      Department Two.
    
   Mr. Justice Denison

delivered the opinion of the court.

This case was here, No. 9931, after judgment below for defendant for $7,000.00 and was reversed. 69 Colo. 325, 194 Pac. 607. The ground of reversal was that the instructions of the court gave to the jury an erroneous basis of the measure of damages.

The case having again come before the district court and the same judge, the record in the former case in this court was, by stipulation, submitted to the court below without further evidence and a judgment was rendered for $6,834.22 for the defendant. Ownbey, the plaintiff, now asks for a supersedeas.

It is obvious that in such a case the only possible assignment of error which we could consider here must be based upon the sufficiency of the evidence. We cannot say that the evidence is insufficient to justify the judgment; as a matter of fact, upon the essential points in the case there is not much dispute.

Supersedeas denied and judgment affirmed.

Mr. Justice Allen and Mr. Justice Whitford concur.