Court Opinion

ID: 9666935
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 01:30:26.478988+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:15:33.617785
License: Public Domain

On Rehearing
PER CURIAM.
In its application for rehearing, Jeffrey Motor Company has pointed out that we were in error in stating that judgment by default was alternatively rendered against the defendant Arthur Dabbs, and has asked that a rehearing be granted in order that the case may be remanded to the district court on its alternative demand against Dabbs.
While a preliminary judgment by default was rendered against Dabbs, the record before us does not disclose the confirmation of this judgment by default. The same evidence adduced on the trial of the cause against A. T. Higgins was offered *867on confirmation of default against Dabbs. Apparently the district court has not ruled on the alternative demand against Dabbs.
The judgment appealed from in this case was a judgment against Higgins alone, from which Higgins alone appealed. As the demand against Dabbs is not before us, we are powerless to rule on it. Our decree dismissing plaintiff’s suit necessarily was limited to a dismissal of the demands against Higgins. Plaintiff’s rights as against Dabbs are in no way timited or affected by our decree in this case.
Rehearing denied.