Court Opinion

ID: 9830052
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 19:50:45.221971+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:43:11.815429
License: Public Domain

On Motion for Rehearing.
In rendering judgment in this case, we overlooked the faet that the plaintiff did not sue for one-half of the amount collected by the defendant in order to extend the lease, but only for one-half of. $1,152.90, which was one-half of 30 cents per acre on 3,S43 acres. The amount so claimed is $576.45; and therefore the judgment heretofore rendered by this court in favor of appellant and against appellee for $831.45 will be reformed so as to limit appellant’s recovery to $576.45.
The other questions presented in appellee’s motion for rehearing and written argument in support of that motion have been duly considered, but our conclusion is that, our former decision correctly disposed of those questions ; and therefore, except as above stated, the motion is overruled.
Motion granted in part, and in part overruled.