Court Opinion

ID: 9831076
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 20:46:46.343725+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:43:30.257293
License: Public Domain

On Appellants’ Motion for Rehearing.
On account of the difficulty this court found in rendering a judgment for a definite amount, the cause was ordered reversed unless the Rio Grande Canal Company filed a ■ remittitur within 15 days, stating the amount remitted; which it attempted to do, but did not state a lump or definite sum. In view of that fact, appellant Ball, instead of meeting that situation as to any definite amount that' should be remitted, filed a general motion for a new trial. So did appellant Lomax file his motion for a rehearing, whereupon we remanded the'entire cause for a new trial.
Appellant Ball now files a second motion for rehearing, insisting that we should enter judgment for the amount indicated by the remittitur of the Rio Grande Canal Company, and that company likewise has filed its motion for a rehearing and joins Ball in his motion that the judgment be entered in accordance with the original opinion of this court for the amount indicated in the re-mittitur.
The motion of appellant John T. Lomax for a rehearing was heretofore overruled; but in view of the fact that his time to apply for a writ of error, if he should so desire, may be jeopardized by this ruling, we again consider and overrule his motion as of this date.
The second motion of appellant Bail, in all other respects than as to the amount of the judgment, is overruled.,
The Rio Grande Canal Company in its motion said that it files “this its remittitur in said cause, and here now agrees to a reduction of said judgment, and authorizes your honorable court to reduce the amount recovered in the trial court as follows: To reduce the total amount specified in the judgment from $2,390.82 to $874.17, and to reduce the amount of principal and interest from $2,173.47 to $794.70, and to reduce the attorney’s fees from $217.35 to $79.47.”
Our judgment remanding the cause for another trial, theretore, is set aside, and the judgment of the trial court, consequently, is here now reversed, ámended, and reformed so that appellee Rio Grande Canal Company do have and recover of and from all tne appellants the sum of $874.17, with interest from the date of the judgment of the trial court.
The judgment is also reformed in favor of appellant Thomas H. Ball against John T. Lomax, so that for any sum of money the said Ball may De compelled to pay under the terms of this judgment to prevent the sale of his property in satisfaction thereof, he shall have his judgment over against the said John T. Lomax.
The judgment is further corrected and reformed, so that any balance remaining after satisfying the claims'shall be paid over to appellant Thomas H. Ball.
The judgment, after being so reformed, is affirmed.
Reformed and affirmed.