Court Opinion

ID: 9828873
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 18:48:49.686047+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:42:53.984010
License: Public Domain

On Motion for Rehearing. .
In the original opinion it was suggested that the evidence raised the issue of gross negligence upon the part of appellee. That expression was not necessary to the decision, was improvidently used, and is now withdrawn. We should add here, since the question was raised in the original opinion, that we have very carefully analyzed the evidence upon motion for rehearing, and are convinced that it shows no element of gross negligence. In truth, the evidence upon no issue pleaded was very satisfactory; it was so meager upon all issues, in fact, that it was only by reading into it every intendment warranted in testing the action of the trial court in directing a verdict, that we arrived at the judgment of reversal. We concluded that, as the evidence upon the part of appellant was so meager, and as no evidence was offered by appellee, the justice of the case could not be determined except upon a more complete development of the true facts of the case, for which purpose the cause was remanded for another trial.
With this modification of the original opinion, appellee’s motion for rehearing is overruled.