Court Opinion

ID: 9834471
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 23:37:23.462897+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:44:16.140021
License: Public Domain

On Rehearing.
In the argument upon motion for rehearing, counsel for appellant chiefly urge us to recede from our holding that the findings of the jury, upon the principal issues of negligence, are supported by evidence. A renewed examination of the evidence convinces us that we were right in holding that the evidence was conflicting, and the answers of the jury are binding upon us.
[7] We should not write at all upon rehearing, except for the request of counsel that' we indicate the reasons for overruling their eleventh proposition, which relates to the refusal of the trial court to admit the written report of the veterinary, who made an examination of a large number of the dead and dying cattle, at the Fort Worth stockyards. This report was made to appellant alone, and was objected to because hearsay, made out of the presence of appellees, and was an attempt to bolster up the testimony of the witness.
We are of the opinion that this ex parte report was clearly hearsay and incompetent evidence, and the court did not err in excluding it. Moreover, it is stated in the brief for appellees,- without contradiction, that this witness testified fully as to results of his examination of the cattle and refreshed his memory from said written report.
We have carefully considered the motion, upon all points, and believe wé have correctly decided the case. The motion is overruled.
Motion overruled.