88 Ind. 188 | Ind. | 1882
— Appellants sued appellees, in an action of replevin, for about 500 bushels of wheat. Appellee Duke, as. the sheriff of Howard county, Indiana, by his deputy, Stewart, had levied executions upon the wheat, as the property of Jacob Brunk, issued upon judgments against said Jacob Brunk and in favor of appellees Champ and Goyer. Appellants "William R. Brunk and Arthur F. Brunk claimed to be the owners of the wheat.
The defendants answered separately, by general denials, except Stewart, who filed a disclaimer of any interest in the matters in controversy, and he was discharged without costs.
There was a trial by the court; a finding was made for the plaintiffs for 222 bushels of the wheat, of the value of $200, and a finding for the defendants for 289 bushels of the wheat, of the value of $260.10; and, over a motion by the plaintiffs for a new trial, judgments were rendered accordingly, and that the plaintiffs recover from the defendants ten twenty-thirds of the costs, and that the defendants recover from the plaintiffs thirteen twenty-thirds of the costs in the case. The error assigned is the overruling of the motion for a new trial. The reasons stated for a new trial are:
1st. The finding is contrary to law.
2d. The finding is not sustained by the evidence.
Upon the first reason i't is insisted that the finding generally for the defendants, for a part of the property, is erroneous;
As to the second error assigned, the evidence is long and somewhat conflicting. We have given it a careful consideration, and can not say that the court did not make an equitable division of the wheat between the parties.
The evidence clearly tended to support the finding of the
The judgment ought to be affirmed.
Per Curiam. — It is therefore ordered, upon the foregoing opinion, that the judgment of the court below be and it is in all things affirmed, with costs.