Court Opinion

ID: 9832494
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 21:57:26.908601+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:43:47.398320
License: Public Domain

On Rehearing.
Appellees make the following prayer in their motion for rehearing:
“We respectfully move the court that they reconsider the opinion rendered in this case and that the judgment of the trial court be affirmed.
“If such relief is not granted, we pray that the opinion be modified so as not to constitute a direction to the trial court to admit evidence which is clearly inadmissible under an unbroken line of authority.”
It is not our purpose to give any instructions to the trial court on the admission or rejection of evidence. No such' issue was presented on this appeal. Our conclusions on the issues discussed were based on the statements made in the briefs of the parties, as we understood them. The statement of facts in this case contains 120 pages. It is not our duty to check through this statement of facts to verify appellant’s statement when not contested. Complaint is also made of our description of the land in controversy as being “a part of a 300-acre tract deeded by Noland to Fitz Henry Bond,” and as being a part of the 275 acres conveyed by Milner and his attorney in fact to appellant. We should have made the statement clear that such was the contention of appellants, and not as an absolute conclusion of fact.
In all other respects the motion for rehearing is overruled.