Court Opinion

ID: 9829489
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 19:21:05.777385+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:43:01.472318
License: Public Domain

On Motion for Rehearing.
In their motion for rehearing and in support of the first' proposition discussed in the original opinion, appellants .call attention, for the first time, to the somewhat flagrant inconsistencies between the testimony of appellees as shown in the record on £he *814first appeal, and in the record on the second appeal. As appellants made no complaint of this matter in the original presentation, they cannot do so on motion for rehearing for the purpose of a reversal.
It was said, in our original opinion, that appellants’ sixth proposition “and assignment on which it is predicated” are too general for consideration. While the proposition was properly disregarded, because too general, the assignments on which it purports to be based are not subject to that criticism.
Appellants’ motion for rehearing is overruled.