Morning appeal. [volume] (Carson City, Nev.) 1877-1906, 1902-01-24

the bill OF sale or in the agreement OF
the parties by which title was not TO
pass except by the delivery OF the bill
OF sale to the vendee,it was CONDITION
favorable to the vendor and solely for |
his security in the matter OF payment |
He could have waived the condition
if he chose, and did voluntarily waive !!
it. in fact. by delivering the property
to the vendee.
The motion was properly overrulcd.
Numerous exceptions appear in the
record as having been taken at the
trial to the rulings upon evidence.
Those to which Importance is attached
are cured. If error occurred. by the
subsequent admission OF the excluded
testimony A telephone message was
introduced in evidence from bank IN
Rene 40 the effect that it would honor
aDpellant's check for the sum demand
ed in the complaint. This evidence
had no bearing upon any issue, and
should have been excluded. but It's adj
mission could have done no possible
injury to the appellant.
The exceptions touching the instruc-
| tons have not been argued and need
| not be considered Tor the reason that
the facts established show that the
Judgment is so clearly right that II
should not be reversed for error, II
there were error. IN admitting or eN-
Guiding evidence or the giving 81 an
erroneous instruction.
| for SEC. $1,000 less admitted credits up
on a sale OF personal property. Ap-
pellant admitted the purchase but de
tended upon the ground ,hat respond
ent had agreed in come elton with the
sale to assign lease which lie had OF
The Klauber ranch where the property
was That he had not assigned the
lease and that the property without
the leasehold right was OF little or nc
value to Appellant That responder
had also agreed to sell none bat sounf
and healthy cattle and the cattle soiC
sgere unsound and unhealthy. and rs
claimed damages IN the slim OF SI0.oc(
caused by respon tent, Interference
with the possession OF the property
: At the trial respondent contended tina
he had never agreed to assign th'
lease OF the ranch for reasons wh:ci
need not be stated. but he had agreee
that he W ouid leave the ranch and ap
pe9ant co;,id take it and assume tn
risk OF possession. with the owner o
the lega1 title Upon cross eNanlina
ton appellant himself confederate,
Il this view He also testified to the cor
u rectness OF an inventory containing
Hot u tt't li'PNt -. dlii ti' AZ w
price ior each item, That he countc
: lie cows. weighed the cheese and biz
l. ter. estimated the value of the h.
and accepted the property at the price
= set opposite the several items Tha
the price ior all was S2o,c4 900. Tha
. respondent never interlered with h:
q possession except by the attachme,l
by the Sheriff for its purchase price
$ By these admissions appellant a
bandoned all defense to the action ex
; cept as to the condition OF the cattle
> There was d contention upon this sub
' jet hut conced ding all that may b
! claimed by the evidence it could no
! materially affect the verdict
It is ordered thar the judgment an
Il order be affirmed
~ I concur:
Massey. c J.
e j dissent for the reasons stated i
The original OPINION II this case.
u Fitzgerald. J.
VI Filed January p. 1902
Eugene Howell.
Secretary OF State and ex-officio cler
Is OF the Supreme Court.
le Filed with printer for publicatio
January %. 1902.
'e Eugene Howell
lel
lie 4 Classmate.