Court Opinion

ID: 9826896
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 16:54:10.833084+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:42:18.356620
License: Public Domain

ON PETITION FOR REHEARING-.
On a former day of the present term an opinion was filed and a judgment entered in this cause affirming the judgment of the circuit court whereby the plaintiff’s suit was dismissed at his cost. Within ten days thereafter a petition for a rehearing was filed on behalf of the plaintiff in error Burris, in which it is stated, in respectful terms, that it is the belief of counsel for the petitioner that this court “misunderstood or overlooked certain material testimony upon vital issues in the case.”
Recognizing the possibility at all times of such misunderstanding or oversight on our part, we have re-examined the record and have found no reason to alter the view's expressed in our former opinion.
The statements in our former opinion with respect to the manner in which defendant’s truck driver deviated from the direct and usual route of travel between defendant’s place of business and the Reformatory, and departed from the service of his employer and the scope of his employment, in order to serve the individual purposes of a third person, are supported by undisputed testimony of William Farrell and Joseph Farrell.
William Farrell, although one of the defendants, was introduced bv plaintiff as his (plaintiff’s) witness, and plaintiff thereby vouched for William Farrell’s truthfulness and cannot question his credibility.
Josephy Farrell was a witness for defendants, but, so far as we have been able to discover, he was not discredited by contradictions of plaintiff’s witnesses with respect to material issues in the case (when the entire testimony of plaintiff Burris and his witness West is read), and there was no attempt to impeach Joseph Farrell by evidence directed against his general character for veracity.
There is no occasion for us to re-state our views as set forth in our former written opinion.
The petition for a rehearing is denied and dismissed, at the cost of the petitioner.
Grown over and DeWitt, JJ., concur.