Court Opinion

ID: 9648547
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-23 14:26:05.933378+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:06:34.238572
License: Public Domain

¡On Motion for Rehearing
Several inaccuracies appear in original opinion that are hereby corrected; not affecting, however, the result: (1) On page four [269 S.W.2d 494], the language to effect that motion non obstante of Cleo Hamilton was sustained is withdrawn. Said judgment non obstante in favor of appel-lee was consequent upon the court’s own conclusion of law, grounded on estoppel, as shown in quoted recitals of the “reformed judgment”. (2) It is disputed that the 1951 partition (though voluntary) “was at the instance of W. B. Hamilton.” (3) The related conversation of Mrs. John D. Mitchell with Mary Lou Hamilton was indeed excluded by the court upon objection, and is expressly deleted from the opinion. Otherwise, said motion for rehearing is in all respects overruled.