Court Opinion

ID: 9832628
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 22:04:25.650994+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:43:49.751963
License: Public Domain

On Motion for Rehearing.
Appellant, in his motion for a rehearing, calls our attention to the fact that Guy S. Combs, individually, was not dismissed from the suit, but that judgment was rendered that plaintiff take nothing as against Guy S. Combs, individually. Our statement in the opinion that the cause was dismissed as to Guy S. Combs is incorrect, and the fact is that judgment was rendered that plaintiff take nothing against him individually. Of course, the effect is exactly the same, so far as this appeal is concerned, but in the interest of accuracy we are glad to make the correction.
Appellant also challenges as inaccurate our statement made with reference to appellant’s attack upon the rate structure of the appellee, to wit: “Appellant’s principal complaint is that the evidence shows that the flat rate was fixed without taking into consideration the one item of profit to the company.” We did not intend to convey the idea by that statement that ap-pellee made this contention in so many words, but, rather, that his contention, when analyzed, amounts to such a contention, or, in other words, that is the construction we place upon his contention.
We have carefully considered appellant’s motion for a rehearing and, being of the opinion that this cause was properly decided in our original opinion, the motion for a rehearing will be overruled.