Court Opinion

ID: 9829030
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 18:56:18.557046+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:42:56.555287
License: Public Domain

On Appellant’s Motion for Rehearing.
The testimony in the case was with reference to a map or plat on which the levees and embankments in question were indicated by “little red dotted lines,” according to the witness Hicks. No such map was sent to-this court with the record. As the testimony apart from the map to which it referred was not understandable, we were unable when we first considered the record to reach an entire; ly satisfactory conclusion as to the merits of the controversy between the parties; and for the same reason we are unable now to determine satisfactorily, from the record, whether the disposition made of the appeal was erroneous as claimed by appellant or not.
There is a map with the statement of facts,, but -it has no “little red dotted lines” on it, evidently is not the map with reference to which the witnesses testified, and because-of the absence of marks or anything on it identifying' parts the witnesses had reference to is of no help to an understanding of the testimony.
The motion is overruled.