(Download) "Bridges v. Pearl River Valley Water Supply District" by Mississippi Supreme Court " Book PDF Kindle ePub Free
eBook details
- Title: Bridges v. Pearl River Valley Water Supply District
- Author : Mississippi Supreme Court
- Release Date : January 05, 2001
- Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
- Pages : * pages
- Size : 73 KB
Description
Conversion — Estoppel — Pleading and Proof — Tender — Failure to Deposit Amount in Court — Costs — Verdicts to be Given Reasonable, not Technical, Construction — Remission of Excess — New Trial not Required. Appeal — Evidence in Conflict — Verdict not to be Disturbed on Appeal. 1. The verdict of a jury will not be disturbed on appeal on the alleged ground of insufficiency of the evidence to sustain it, when the evidence is in substantial conflict upon the material issues raised by the pleadings. Conversion — Estoppel — Evidence Admissible Under Answer — Question Whether Pleading of Estoppel was Sufficient Immaterial. 2. Where evidence showing estoppel in an action in conversion was admissible under defendants denials and his affirmative defense of tender, the question whether his pleading relative to estoppel was insufficient and did not constitute a defense held immaterial. Same — Tender — Failure to Deposit Amount in Court Deprives Party of Right to Costs on Verdict in His Favor. 3. Where defendant in an action for damages for conversion alleged tender of a given amount admitted by him to be due under a conditional sales contract of an automobile, but failed to show that he deposited the amount with the clerk of the court as required by section 9794, Revised Codes 1921, he was not entitled to his costs upon a verdict in his favor. Verdicts to be Given Reasonable not Technical Construction. 4. A verdict is not to be technically construed, but is to be given such a reasonable construction as will carry out the obvious intention of the jury; and if from the record, by reference to the issues made by the pleadings, the instructions and the evidence submitted, its intention is manifest it should be permitted to stand. Conversion — Failure of Verdict to Award Plaintiff Amount Admittedly Due — When not Cause for New Trial. 5. Under the last above rule, held, that where defendant in an action in conversion admitted he owed plaintiff $9.50, the latter asserting that the amount due was $443, and the jury found "in favor of defendant" without awarding to plaintiff the sum admittedly Page 255 due, the judgment entered in conformity to the verdict was error, but not sufficient to entitle plaintiff to a new trial, it being apparent that the verdict was in substantial conformity to the pleadings, and the error being remediable by direction to enter the proper judgment in conformity to the pleadings and proof.
 "Bridges v. Pearl River Valley Water Supply District" by Mississippi Supreme Court " Book PDF Kindle ePub Free){kind=link}