Court Opinion

ID: 9846927
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-24 03:50:41.619287+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:16:57.356077
License: Public Domain

On Denial of Respondents’ Petition for Rehearing.
TAYLOR, Justice.
In their petition for a rehearing respondents urge at great length that the majority opinion is in error in not requiring the plaintiff below to prove not only the fact. of substantial damage, hut the exact amount of such damage in order to avoid the nonsuit.
Particularly respondents complain of the inaccuracy of the statement in the opinion that the net income for the year 1952 was $5673.22. The inaccuracy according to respondents arises out of the fact that the gross income, used as the basis for determining the net income, included only room rent and not the profit made by the hotel upon guests’ laundry and telephone calls. As to such other income, the defendant Smith testified that it would be insignificant “as compared with the room rent.” The gross income cannot be determined accurately from the record. Mr. Smith as a witness was evasive, and professed to know very little about the income or expenses of the business which he managed. However, accepting the figures given by respondents in their petition, it nevertheless appears that appellant made a clear showing of substantial injury, and sufficient to present to the jury the determination of the amount thereof from a preponderance of the evidence.
KEETON, C. J., and SMITH, J., concur.
PORTER and McQUADE, JJ., dissent.