Court Opinion

ID: 9833672
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 22:56:18.621589+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:44:05.774776
License: Public Domain

.On Motion for Rehearing.
Counsel for appellant have filed a very earnest, dignified, and able motion for rehearing, in deference to which we have carefully gone over the case again. We have particularly examined the evidence upon the issue of whether or not the parties entered into the parol contract set up by appellant. We find that aE the material evidence upon that issue was set out fully and fairly in the briefs of the parties, and was conscientiously considered by this court in affirming the judgment of the court below. We adhere to that decision.
Appellant seems to construe the original opinion to hold that Leopoldo Marines’ mental interpretation of his wife’s legal interest in the property in dispute could be given such effect as to impair the validity of a parol sale to appellant. But we did not so hold; in any event, we did not intend to so hold. We simply held, in substance, that the jury were authorized to consider Marines’ attitude in weighing his testimony that he did not in fact enter into the alleged agreement.
The motion will be ‘overruled.