Court Opinion

ID: 9832256
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 21:45:50.417291+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:43:44.848751
License: Public Domain

On Rehearing.
[8] Appellant’s counsel have called our attention, in motion for rehearing, to the fact that, while the case was on submission in oral argument in open court, appellee’s counsel waived the defects in appellant’s brief, as applied to assignments first, second, and third, in so far as the same had not been prepared in accordance with rule No. 31, which fact we overlooked in disposing of this appeal and in the preparation of the written opinion filed therein. In view of the oral agreement, made in open court, in justice to appellant, we feel that assignments first, second, and third should be considered by this court as if properly briefed, and we will therefore do so.
[9] As stated in the original opinion, however, the verdict of the jury being in response to a peremptory instruction given by the trial court, the portions of the court’s main charge complained of under the first, second, and third assignments became immaterial.
We have carefully reviewed the reasons given in .appellant’s motion for a rehearing, and believing that the case was properly disposed oE in our original opinion, except as herein qualified, the motion for rehearing will be overruled, and it is so ordered.