Court Opinion

ID: 9818066
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 05:14:30.242146+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:09:52.934372
License: Public Domain

On Rehearing.
McNEILL, O. J.
Plaintiff contends that he should have been entitled to a directed verdict on his first cause of action for the sum of $1,771, being the admitted liability due on the note given for the payment of the threshing machine, separator, and other' equipment described in said cause of action.
This contention is without support. As against this admitted liability defendant alleged damages by way of counterclaim in the sum of $8,111.88. Erom the evidence, the jury found, under proper instructions, that the damages of defendant exceeded the amount of plaintiff’s admitted liability by the sum of $690. It is manifest that the threshing machine note was thereby fully liquidated and by reason thereof the defendant was entitled to a return of said property, involved in said first cause of action, which had been taken under a writ of replevin, or its value, which the jury fixed at $1,446.30.
Rehearing is denied.
OSBORN, V. 0. J., and RILEY, BUSBY, WELCH, CORN, and GIBSON, JJ, concur. PHELPS, J., not participating. BAYLESS, J., absent.