Court Opinion

ID: 9828252
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 18:14:20.190349+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:42:46.633393
License: Public Domain

*806On Appellant’s Motion for Rehearing.
Appellant calls attention to a paragraph, in our original opinion, to wit:
“Since neither appellant nor appellee has filed any exceptions to the report of the auditor, each one of them is now precluded from objecting to said report, or to any finding of the trial court based thereon.”
He urges that he did not complain of the report of the auditor, but in fact, asked below, and here asks, that judgment he rendered according to said report, giving appel-lee only one-half of the value of the community estate so found, to wit, one-half of $49,464.59. We do not think that the trial court was limited by the report in determining what part of the community estate ap-pellee should receive. He is only limited by the statute, article 463S, Rev. Oiv. Statutes, to “order a division of the estate of the parties in such a way as the court shall deem just and right, having due regard to the rights of each party.” We are not prepared to say that the trial court did not exercise a due regard for the rights of each party in' settling the property rights of the parties as he decreed in his judgment.
The motion for rehearing is overruled.