Court Opinion

ID: 9828206
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 18:12:23.741442+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:42:45.665252
License: Public Domain

On Appellees’- Motion for Rehearing.
■ We held in the original opinion herein that the jfidgment rendered by -the court in favor.,of appellee Biggers was excessive, in that, interest had been calculated at 10-per cent, per annum when it should have been calculated at only 8 per cent, per an-num, and that 10 per cent, attorney’s fees on the amount of appellee’s-debt had been *271improperly allowed. Appellee has filed a remittitur of such excess, and asks in his motion for rehearing herein that the judgment of the trial court be reformed so as to exclude such excess and that the same, as reformed, be affirmed. The amount of ap-pellee’s recovery is, under the authority of such remittitur, here reduced to $2486.68, and it is ordered that such sum bear interest from April 29, 1936, the date of the original judgment, at the rate of 8 per cent, per annum. The order remanding the cause is set aside and the judgment of the trial court, as so reformed, is here affirmed. The costs of appeal are taxed against said appellee.