Court Opinion

ID: 9658278
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-23 20:54:14.316638+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:13:53.317946
License: Public Domain

On Petition for Rehearing.
TEIGEN, Judge.
The appellant has petitioned for a rehearing upon several grounds. All of them have been fully discussed and disposed of in the original opinion with one possible exception. The appellant states that we failed to pass on assignment of error No. 5, in which it urges that the trial court in its order directing judgment notwithstanding the verdict also denied the motion for new trial. This point was disposed of in the first appeal of this case reported in 122 N.W.2d 151, by reference to the reasoning set forth in Chicago, M., St.P. & P. R. Co. v. Johnston’s Fuel Liners, N.D., 122 N.W.2d 140, which case was consolidated for trial with this one. We reversed the judgment notwithstanding the verdict and ordered judgment entered consistent with the verdict, subject however to the right of Prince to proceed promptly for a ruling on his motion for a new trial. For this reason this matter is now res judicata.
The appellant also argues that the opinion lacks clarity in that it does not make clear whether the judgment is final as against Johnston’s Fuel Liners. The trial court, in its order granting Prince a new trial, stated:
“That this Order shall in no manner affect or set aside the Judgment of the Plaintiff in the above entitled action against the Defendant, Johnston’s Fuel Liners, Inc., a corporation.”
In our decision affirming the trial court’s order we did not modify this part of the order. Further, the appellant has not moved for a new trial. Petition for a rehearing is denied.
MORRIS, C. J., and BURKE and ERICKSTAD, JJ., concur.
STRUTZ, J., did not participate.