Court Opinion

ID: 9690486
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 19:14:58.607064+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:18:57.545363
License: Public Domain

On Petition for Rehearing
SANDSTROM, Justice.
[¶ 32] In their petition for rehearing, the plaintiffs strenuously argue that they did not invite error by the district court. The defendants argue there was no error, but if there was, plaintiffs invited it. Defendants further argue that if there was uninvited error, it does not matter because it would not change the judgment in this case.
[¶ 33] After careful review, we conclude that even if we agreed with the plaintiffs that there was uninvited error on the part of the district court, it would not change the outcome. Therefore we modify the opinion and deny the petition for rehearing.
[¶ 34] GERALD W. VANDE WALLE, C.J., DANIEL J. CROTHERS, and CAROL RONNING KAPSNER, JJ., concur.