Court Opinion

ID: 9832394
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 21:52:44.050207+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:43:46.354161
License: Public Domain

On Motion for Rehearing.
Upon further consideration of plaintiff’s petition, we are convinced that as against a general demurrer it was reasonably sufficient to present the issue of estoppel as against defendant Mrs. C. P. Ambrose, and accordingly the observation made to the contrary in opinion on original hearing is now withdrawn.
However, we overrule the contention that the evidence 'conclusively sustained that plea, since as shown by the court’s findings, the written .statement given by Mrs.'Ambrose, set out in those findings, was given before there had been any rainfall to test the efficiency of the roof, and since the lien contract which was a part and parcel of the note sued on, and which appellant sought to enforce in connection with the note, contained a written guaranty of the roof against leaks for a period of ten years.
The evidence being ample to support the court’s finding that the roof put on by the Pulliam Company was worthless, the further finding that it had been removed resulted in no harm to appellant, and therefore may be treated as surplusage, even if appellant is correct in the contention that there was no evidence to support it.
The motion is overruled.