Court Opinion

ID: 9536131
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 06:55:29.61826+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:33:27.835254
License: Public Domain

DORAN, J.
Both appellants and respondents petition for a rehearing. Appellants request a modification to clarify the question as to whether the judgment of reversal includes a reversal of the order denying defendants’ motion for a judgment notwithstanding the verdict. Although the notice of appeal included an appeal from said order and, the record of that fact is noted in the opinion, nevertheless, no reference thereto is to be found in the briefs.
Appellants’ opening brief specifies but three questions involved in the appeal and no question is raised therein concerning the above mentioned order. Nor does respondent make any reference thereto. So far as the briefs are concerned, the question was abandoned. The questions raised were all considered in the opinion and a reversal of the order denying the motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict is therefore not included in the order of reversal.
Respondents’ petition for a rehearing relies apparently, on the court’s failure to base the opinion upon the rule that “Plaintiffs’ cause of action was predicated upon.” The trial *244court’s order denying defendants’ motion for a judgment notwithstanding the verdict, is also referred to for the first time.
■ For the reasons stated, both of the petitions for rehearing are denied.
York, P. J., and White, J., concurred.
• Respondents’ petition for a hearing by the Supreme Court was denied December 20, 1945. Gibson, C. J., and Carter, J., voted for a hearing.