Court Opinion

ID: 9864494
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-25 13:33:42.245268+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:14:07.764874
License: Public Domain

THE COURT.
— The appellant on petition for rehearing herein calls attention to the fact that there is no testimony *277supporting the finding of the trial court that the sheep committing the trespass alleged to have taken place on the seventh day of May, 1924, were the sheep belonging to the defendant and, also, that there is no testimony that the defendant knew of such trespass.
The trial court found that on or about the seventh day of May, 1924, the defendant Reese T. Jenkins, by his agents, representatives, and servants herded and grazed about 250 ewes and lambs upon the premises (described as belonging to the plaintiff) without first having obtained consent of such owner or of the tenants in possession.
The appellant’s opening brief contains the following statement: “There is absolutely no testimony to support the second finding that the defendant herded and grazed sheep upon plaintiff's lands, but as the .court finds that there was no damage for his so-called trespassing, there is no use of discussing that point.” The second finding above referred to is the finding of the court which we have just set forth. There being no further argument made by counsel for appellant upon said finding, we assumed that the finding was probably correct, but whether correct or incorrect, as no damages were awarded for that purpose, it became wholly immaterial. It is now argued, however, that because in the opinion heretofore filed in this cause by this court, we referred to the trespass committed on the ninth day of May, 1924, as having been committed by the same sheep, a rehearing should be granted, because it does not sufficiently ■ appear that the same sheep committed the trespass, or that the sheep that committed the trespass on May 7th actually belonged to the defendant. While we referred to the trespass committed by the sheep on' May 7th as being of the same band of sheep committing the trespass on May 9, 1924, for which damages were awarded, we attach absolutely no legal significance as to whether it was or was not the same band of sheep. We might state that a re-examination of the testimony would indicate that the findings of the court that the sheep committing the trespass on May 7, 1924, belonged to the defendant has but little to support it, and for the purposes of what we are about to state, it may be conceded that the finding is not supported by the testimony. It appears that the plaintiffs based their allegations of ownership and their conclusions as to the ownership of the band of sheep *278committing the trespass on May 7th upon what a herder employed by the defendant had told them. This evidence was not admitted into the record.  The real question which the court was deciding was whether the sheep committing the trespass on May 9th were sheep running at large upon the range or whether they were sheep being herded. This question is so completely answered by one of the defendant’s witnesses, who was one of the persons in charge of the sheep, that we will set it forth verbatim. It may be further stated that this testimony shows that the herder had knowledge of a trespass by the same sheep upon the same premises on two different occasions, when the damages were inflicted by the band of sheep. The testimony of the witness Urtsan, to whom we have referred, called by the defendant, testified as follows: “By Mr. Barry: Q. What is your name? A. Steve Urtsan. Q. You know Reese Jenkins? A. Yes. Q. You worked for him last year? A. Yes. Q. You know where the Cramer’s place is out to Horse Lake? A. Yes sir. Q. Were you working out there in 1924? A. Yes sir. Q. What were you doing? A. Tending camp for Jenkins. Q. And did he have sheep out there ? A. Yes sir. Q. Were you out there when he sheared? A. Yes sir. Q. Do you remember a bunch of those sheep getting in the Cramer field? A. Yes sir. Q. What time was that? A. I don’t exactly know what day it was. Q. You know what month? A. It was in May. Q. Who was with the sheep when they got in the field? A. The herder and me. Q. And how many did you have? A. We had little over two thousand. Eleven hundred ewes and eleven hundred lambs. Q. You had about two thousand ewes and lambs ? A. Yes. Q. Did some of them get away? A. Yes. Q. How many? A. I don’t know how many altogether. Q. About how many? A. I seen a bunch go through into the field was about couple of hundred the way it looks to me. Q. What did you do when they got into the field? A. Went after them. Q. Were you with the sheep when they got in the field? A. Yes sir. Q. Did anybody come in from the Cramer ranch ? A. Two men horseback. Q. Who were they? A. I don’t know. I wasn’t close enough. Q. What did you do with the sheep? A. Try to bring them back to the bunch but before I got there two fellows come on horseback and get there and take bunch and drive them home. Q. How far were they from *279the fence when you first saw them? A. Inside you mean? Q. Yes. A. Two or three hundred yards. Q. What was you going to do with them? A. Take them back to the bunch. Q. Get them out of the field? A. Yes. Q. These fellows took them and drove them over to the house? A. Yes sir. Q. Were the sheep trying to graze or were they after water? A. They was trying for the water. They didn’t look for feed at that time. Q. And if they had let you could you have got them out and got them to water? A. I don’t understand. Q. If they hadn’t taken them to the house what would you have done with them ? A. Bring them back right away. We had water little ways from there.» Q. You would have taken them over to the water ? A. Yes. Q. Did any more sheep get away that day? A. Not out of that bunch. Q. Later, did any sheep get away and go in the field? A. Not later in that bunch. Q. Did you see anybody from the Cramer place any more that day? A. No sir. Q. Was that the only time any of the Jenkins sheep went under the fence ? A. Before that bunch ? The first bunch they took in the corral, I never saw that bunch. Q. They had taken a bunch that morning? A. Yes. Q. About what time of day was that when you were there? A. It was from twelve o’clock to half past twelve, something like that. Q. You were with the sheep, you and the herder? A. Yes. They had that bunch get away, the herder come to get his dinner. ’ ’
This testimony amply justifies the finding of the trial court that the sheep were being herded and did not come within the classification of animals running at large upon the range. In this we think the trial court did not err.
The petition for rehearing is denied.