Court Opinion

ID: 9833378
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 22:39:58.650112+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:44:02.115476
License: Public Domain

On Motion for Rehearing.
Appellants have filed a motion for a rehearing presenting many assignments of error against our holdings on original hearing. We have carefully considered all of them, and do not believe any error is shown, and hence they are all overruled.
Appellees have also filed motion for rehearing, and insist that we erred in holding that the trial court erred in permitting appel-lees, over the objections of appellants, to elicit from a number of their witnesses— expert surveyors—their opinions as to where was the true location of the west line of the Uhler survey, the controlling question in the case. We have again carefully considered the matter as presented by appellees, and find no reason to change our opinion on original hearing. However, appellees urgently insist that appellants should not be heard to complain in this particular, because, it is contended, they resorted to the same character of evidence in the trial of the case to support their contention, and are, therefore, es-topped from asserting this as error. We do not think the record will support appellees in this contention, but if it could be said to do so, still the evidence referred to by appel-lees was introduced without objection, and, under the law, appellants are not estopped to urge their assignment, for if improper evidence has been admitted without objection, the other party does not have the right, over objection, to introduce other improper evidence to rebut it. Dolson v. De Ganahl, 70 Tex. 620, 8 S. W. 321; Massey v. Allen (Tex. Civ. App.) 222 S. W. 682.
The motion is in all things overruled.