Court Opinion

ID: 9831740
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 21:19:37.023432+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:43:37.488788
License: Public Domain

On Second Motion for Rehearing.
We agree with appellants’ counsel that there is considerable confusion with reference to the right to appeal and assign error upon the action of the trial court in giving or refusing a peremptory instruction when the request is based upon the sufficiency or insufficiency of the evidence; but since the request made by appellant in this case is not a “charge,” as decided by the Supreme Court in Walker et al. v. Haley, 214 S. W. 295, the matter must be properly presented in this court before it is entitled to consideration. The request made by appellant is as follows:
“Gentlemen of the jury, you are instructed that the evidence introduced in this case is insufficient to sustain a verdict for the plaintiff, and you will therefore find for the defendants and so say by your verdict.”
There were two defendants in the case, and plaintiff’s right to recover of them rested upon different grounds and was attempted to be sustained by proof of different facts. If the court thought the evidence was sufficient to sustain the judgment as to one defendant and not as to the other, it would have been improper to grant the request.
The second motion for rehearing is overruled^