Court Opinion

ID: 9830209
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 19:58:57.236288+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:43:16.074562
License: Public Domain

On Motion for Rehearing.
The judgment of the trial court was on our original consideration of this case ordered reversed and the cause remanded for another trial, because the trial court awarded appellees a recovery of $706.17 for electric current purchased by them to run their ■plant while testing the engine purchased by them from appellant. Appellees assail our holding on this question, but a re-examination thereof has not changed our conclusion with reference thereto. Appellees’ motion for rehearing is therefore overruled.
Appellees have asked us, in event we overrule their motion for rehearing, to rend.er a judgment denying them recovery for such item, and to affirm, the judgment of the trial court as so modified.
The judgment heretofore rendered by this court is therefore set aside, and the judgment of the trial court is reformed, denying appellees a recovery for said item. Appel-lees’ total recovery was $4,236.76. An item of $215.80 legal interest is included in said *273recovery. Deducting from appellees’ total recovery the said sum of $706.17, and proportionate interest therein in the sum of $37.85, there remains the sum of $3,492.74 for which appellees were properly awarded a recovery against appellant.
The judgment of the trial court is reformed so as to reduce appellees’ judgment against appellant to the said sum of $3,492.-74, with legal interest thereon from the date of the judgment in the trial court; and, as so reformed, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.