Court Opinion

ID: 9825511
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 13:16:16.917832+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:40:55.951063
License: Public Domain

On Rehearing.
In brief of counsel filed on application for rehearing, the insistence is made that the effect of the opinion of the court was to hold that some of the witnesses for plaintiff had lied. The court in its opinion said no such thing, meant no such thing, and such a conclusion on the part of counsel is unwarranted. Counsel, in their zeal to present propositions to the court, should be careful not to charge the court unjustly with conclusions, not reached by it. There is in the opinion no decision or intimation that any witness has lied, or even evaded the truth. That question is not for this court to pass upon, but one for the jury, and it is for them to tveigh and pass upon the credibility of the witness.
[6] Nor do we see ‘the occasion for the impassioned statements, outside the record, calling this court’s attention to the wealth and standing of plaintiffs, covering a long period of years. Certainly counsel would not urge that fact as a basis for a decision which would not otherwise be rendered. Before the law, all men are equal, and their testimony and acts, when presented in court, must stand the scrutiny and tests of legal principles. Juries pass upon the credibility of witnesses under instructions from the court, and in this case this court has not sought to invade this province. However, lest unwarranted inference may be drawn from illustrations given, the court modifies the opinion to the extent of striking out the illustrations of the principle stated.
We see no reason for changing the conclusions arrived at by the court, and therefore the application for rehearing is overruled.
Application overruled.