Case Name: Indiana Board and Filler Co. v. White
Court: Appellate Court of Indiana
Jurisdiction: Indiana
Decision Date: 1919-11-04
Citations: 72 Ind. App. 616
Docket Number: No. 10,113
Parties: Indiana Board and Filler Co. v. White.
Judges: 
Reporter: Indiana Court of Appeals Reports
Volume: 72
Pages: 616–617

Head Matter:
Indiana Board and Filler Co. v. White.
[No. 10,113.
Filed November 4, 1919.
Rehearing denied February 20, 1920.]
1. Sales.—Evidence.—Sufficiency.—In an action for balance due for straw sold, testimony of the plaintiff as to what he was to receive per ton for the straw, corroborated to some extent by' two other witnesses, was sufficient to sustain a verdict for plaintiff. p. 617.
2. Appeal. — Review. — Weighing Evidence. — Credibility. —'The weight of testimony and credibility of witnesses were matters for the jury, and not for the Appellate Court, p. 617.
From Knox Circuit Court; B. M. Willoughby, Judge.
Action by Arthur White' against the Indiana Board and Filler Company. From a judgment for plaintiff, the defendant appeals.
Affirmed.
J. W. Emison, W. S. Hoover, E. R. Emison and W. M. Alsop, for appellant.
Samuel M. Emison, for appellee.

Opinion:
Enloe, J.
—Action by appellee against appellant upon a complaint in one paragraph to recover an alleged balance due him upon a contract for sale of straw. Appellant answered, first, in general denial; and, second, by plea of payment, to which appellee replied in general denial.
The issues thus formed were submitted to a jury, which returned its verdict in favor of appellee, upon which, after having overruled appellant's motion for a new trial, the court rendered judgment. The action of the court in overruling said motion is the only error assigned.
The only assignment which, under the rules of this court, is presented for our consideration is that the verdict is not sustained by sufficient evidence.
• The verdict is amply sustained by the evidence. The appellee testified as to what he was to receive per ton for the straw, and he was to some extent corroborated by two other witnesses. The brief filed by the appellant herein contains quite an extended argument as to weight of testimony, and credibility of witnesses, but this was a matter for the jury below, and not for this court.
No error has been shown, and the judgment is therefore affirmed.