Court Opinion

ID: 9832326
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 21:49:25.789345+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:43:45.681142
License: Public Domain

On Motion for Rehearing
Appellee, Mrs. Barrett, in her motion for rehearing, urges that the answers -of the jury to the third, fourth and fifth special issues demonstrate that the answer actually made to the second issue was an unintended finding. Appellee further urges that there is no evidence to support the answer made to the second issue, as we have construed the answer of the jury, and that the trial court was therefore authorized to disregard the answer to the second issue. She also urges that we have arbitrarily exercised original jurisdiction in finding a fact contrary to the intended finding of the jury.
We are required to accept the findings of the jury as they appear in the verdict, and have no authority to substitute therefor in the verdict our notions of what the jury intended to find.
The trial court would not have been authorized to render judgment notwithstanding the answer to the second is- ■ sue for the reason that no motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict was filed, nor do we have authority to render judgment notwithstanding the answer to the second issue in the situation presented in the present case.
*1002Appellee’s attack upon the verdict, made for the first time in her motion for rehearing in this court, comes too late.
We have carefully examined the other contentions presented by appellee in her motion for rehearing, as well as those presented in the motion for rehearing filed by the United States of America, but adhere to the views which we expressed in our original opinion.
The motions for rehearing are overruled.