Court Opinion

ID: 9833942
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 23:10:31.840585+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:44:09.621754
License: Public Domain

ON MOTION EOR REHEARING.
Appellants have filed a motion for rehearing in which they contend that we erred in our judgment rendered herein on April 7, 1910, in remanding the cause for new trial upon the issues joined between appellants and the appellee Burke. Upon a re-examination of the record we have reached the -conclusion that this contention is sound. It appears from the record that the case was fully developed on these issues, and, there being no conflict in the evidence, the trial court, under the rule of law announced in our former opinion, should have rendered judgment in favor of appellants against said appellee.
Having reversed the judgment of the court below, and there being no matter of fact necessary to be ascertained, and the amount of damages being fixed, it was the duty of this court, under article 1027, Sajdes Civil Statutes, to render the judgment that should have been rendered in the court below. It follows that the motion for rehearing should be granted and so much of our former judgment as remands *454the cause for a new trial as between appellants and appellee Burke, should be set aside and judgment here rendered in favor of appellants against said appellee for the sum of $597.53, with interest thereon from January 22, 1909, at the rate of 10 percent per annum, this being the amount found by the court below to be due upon the note of defendant B. H. Powell in favor of appellants upon which defendant Burke is endorser. That portion of the former judgment of this court remanding the cause for a new trial as between appellants and appellee Charlton and between appellees Charlton and Burke is undisturbed.

Reversed and rendered in part, and remanded in part.