Court Opinion

ID: 9831915
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 21:28:48.591122+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:43:39.435386
License: Public Domain

On Motion for Rehearing.
[3] Appellants earnestly insist that the evidence requires a reversal of the judgment and a rendering in favor of them. We have again considered the issues presented in the briefs, the statement of facts and transcript, and find that the evidence is sufficient to susstain the judgment below on the ground that Herndon abandoned the effort to sell the property for $4,000, and so stated to Williams before the latter sold it to Ludke. Wé do not think such defense required a special pleading to make admissible the testimony referred to in our original opinion, and that said testimony was admissible under the general denial.
The motion for rehearing is overruled.