Court Opinion

ID: 9810971
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-31 22:05:22.858436+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:40:22.683207
License: Public Domain

Hoke, J.,
dissenting: I think tbe record and case on appeal show tbat there was evidence for the consideration of tbe jury of facts and circumstances which should have put the defendant Robertson on inquiry, and which would have led to. knowledge of tbe fraud established by the verdict against Dickerson and Dickerson & Co.; and the jury should-have been allowed to determine the question of the bona fides of Robertson’s purchase in that aspect of the testimony.
In my opinion, therefore, there was error on the part of the trial Judge in charging the jury that if they believed tbe evidence they would answer the issue, addressed to tbat question, in favor of tbe defendant. As there is no question of law or legal inference seriously involved, however, I do not consider it necessary or desirable to discuss the case more at length.