Court Opinion

ID: 9833640
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 22:54:56.957695+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:44:05.549706
License: Public Domain

On Motion for Rehearing.
Appellants’ motion has convinced us that our original statement that the auditor took the sum of $408 from the aggregate balance he found in favor of Saltes was error; re-examination of the record shows that neither this nor any other amount on account of extra help to take Saltes’ place was in fact charged up to him, whereas the whole of that so found by the auditor should have been; to that extent, therefore, the motion for rehearing will be granted, and our former judgment of affirmance will now be so reformed as to deduct from Saltes’ recovery this sum of $408, together with 6 per cent, interest per annum thereon from October 15, 1927, to November 2, 1927, or an aggregate amount of $409.20, but otherwise will be left undisturbed. Except as indicated, the motion is overruled.
Granted in part, and former judgment reformed.