Court Opinion

ID: 9639659
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 16:43:39.670826+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:10:20.815001
License: Public Domain

PARKER, Chief Justice,
(concurring):
I concur in the result but do not agree with the last sentence of the last paragraph of Justice Stephenson’s majority opinion as it may be susceptible to an erroneous inference. Therefore, the statement below is made even though Justice Stephenson does not consider such sentence justifies an erroneous inference. One hundred forty acres in rice per year was authorized by the contract with the rental fixed at $12.50 per acre for 140 acres. The contract was breached by the planting of more than 140 acres in rice each year. The contract does not authorize tenant to plant more than 140 acres in rice with a rental on the excess of $12.50 per acre. That the judgment for damages is equal to the amount of money by multiplying $12.50 per acre times the excess acreage planted each year is not a recovery under the contract but by breach of the contract. In the absence of a statement of facts this court must assume there was evidence establishing the proper measure of damages for breach of the contract by planting over 140 acres in rice each year.