Court Opinion

ID: 9825882
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 14:14:45.73739+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:41:27.117102
License: Public Domain

Hart, J., (on rehearing). Counsel for appellees call our attention to the fact that counsel for appellant announced at the trial of the case that they were not seeking any recovery against the drainage district, but were seeking to recover against the commissioners as individuals. Therefore counsel for appellees insist that it is too late now for the appellant to shift his ground and ask for a reversal of the judgment against the commissioners individually who are held not to be personally liable under the opinion in this case. Counsel for appellees are correct in this contention. In St. Louis Southwestern Ry. Co. v. White Sewing Machine Co., 78 Ark. 1, and in other decisions of this court, it has been held that questions that were conceded at the trial will not be decided on appeal. We deem it proper to say that the drainage district was made a defendant to the action in the circuit court, and we do not find in the record any order dismissing the case as to the district. Therefore, the case is still pending against the drainage district in the court below and the rights' of the respective parties on that branch of the case have not been decided and are not involved in this appeal. The result of our views is that the motion for a rehearing filed by appellees will be granted, and the judgment of the circuit court in favor of the commissioners as individuals will be affirmed.