Court Opinion

ID: 9668705
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 02:23:15.73364+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:15:47.497244
License: Public Domain

On Motion for Rehearing
On original disposition of this case we reversed and remanded the case because it did not appear that certified or sworn copies of Mr. Dunn’s will and the order admitting it to probate were in evidence. We have now been furnished with the original of appellee’s Third Amended Original Petition and attached to it as a part thereof are requisite certified copies. This being the only ground of reversal, the question arises as to the judgment now to be rendered.
*664We held that the trial court’s judgment finding that appellee was entitled to one-half of the net profits after appellants had recouped $1500.00 was supported under the uncontroverted evidentiary facts either on the basis of a resulting trust or an agreement to create a trust based on an adequate consideration. The court did not'state on which theory he based his judgment. The depositions, affidavits and pleadings will support either theory, depending on inferences drawn by the trier of the facts. No reasonable inference may be drawn, however, that would support any position taken by appellants. The result is that the court was correct in its judgment in favor of appellee.
Appellee’s motion for rehearing is granted. Our judgment reversing the cause is set aside and the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.