Court Opinion

ID: 9864622
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-25 14:28:18.558592+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:17:00.037980
License: Public Domain

THE COURT.
—Rehearing is denied. It is true the opinion quotes from the opinion on the former appeal in which the judgment for nonsuit was reversed and the cause remanded for trial to permit the defendant and cross-complainant bank to establish, if it could, the allegations regarding estoppel and to disprove the evidence offered in support of the claim of cross-complainant Minnie Helene Setchel. While the fact that the final trial was had before a different judge was not called to our attention, it will be noted that the opinion states: “The same facts summarized in the quotation from the opinion on the former appeal as given by Mrs. Setchel in her deposition were again testified to by her on the issues raised by reason of the appearance in the action of the interveners”; and, further, “we have not only considered the testimony set out on the briefs of appellant, respondent bank and the interveners and cross-complainants, but have read the entire record,” it follows, therefore, that the evidence adduced at the trial of the case originally, from which we have quoted, is not given the character res judicata.
*500Petitions by respondents to have the cause heard in the supreme court, after judgment in the district court of appeal, were denied by the supreme court on February 11, 1929.
All the Justices present concurred.