Court Opinion

ID: 9443135
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-03 19:11:57.441103+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:29:23.070623
License: Public Domain

On Petition for Rehearing.
PER CURIAM.
The plaintiff (appellee) in his petition for rehearing asserts that this Court, in ruling that he had failed to sustain the burden of proving that Jane Hartman had signed the offer in suit, overlooked the fact that the defendants (appellants) had not brought up a record including all of the evidence relating to that issue and had therefore failed to demonstrate that the finding of the District Court that she had signed the offer was clearly erroneous. But eliminating so much of our opinion as deals with that issue the result would be the same since we are convinced that there was no legal basis to warrant a determination that the offer of the Hartmans to transfer the property in suit was ever accepted by the creditors of the Hartman Corporation or ever became a binding and enforceable obligation. It is therefore obvious that no purpose could be served iby a rehearing of the case.
The petition for rehearing is denied.