Court Opinion

ID: 9831964
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 21:30:32.956305+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:43:40.202562
License: Public Domain

On Motion for Rehearing.
[28] Appellants’ motion for rehearing raises no question that has not been fully considered and decided in the original opinion, save, perhaps, the question presented in this motion under the 142d assignment, which complains that it was fundamental error not to allow him anything for the taxes paid on the land in controversy.. The uncontroverted evidence shows that, while he occupied the relation of attorney towards appellees, in his endeavor to overreach and defraud them of their interest in the land which it was his sacred duty to protect, he paid--the taxes, not for them, but sought, through the medium of such payment, to acquire title to all their, interest in the land and to hold it adversely to them. Convicted of this fraud by the verdict of the jury, he now says to a court of justice: “You erred in not compelling my clients to pay me money which I used in my effort to defraud them out of the interest in property which it was my duty, as their attorney, to protect them in.” Courts of conscience will do no such thing.
Motion overruled.