Adams v. Cohn
| Decision Date | 19 December 1894 |
| Citation | 28 S.W. 909 |
| Parties | ADAMS v. COHN. |
| Court | Texas Court of Appeals |
Appeal from district court, Bexar county; G. H. Noonan, Judge.
Action by A. M. Cohn against H. B. Adams for services rendered. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals. Affirmed.
Simpson & Onion, for appellant. A. Lewy, for appellee.
This appeal is prosecuted from a judgment for $400, which was rendered in the district court of Bexar county on a claim for $2,500, for services rendered to appellant in making out for him a detailed statement of the accounts between appellant and the estate of his deceased partner. Appellant answered by general demurrer and general denial. We find the following facts sufficiently established: Appellee, being an expert bookkeeper and accountant, was employed by appellant to examine into the books of Adams & Wickes, and make a detailed statement of affairs between the members of the firm. The examination was made by appellee of books running through the years from 1876 to 1891, and a detailed statement of the account was furnished to appellant. Appellee was engaged in this work at intervals from May to November, 1891, and was assisted by his son. Again, appellee was employed by appellant to make another detailed statement. He was occupied in this work at intervals from September 15, 1892, to January 15, 1893. There was no agreement as to the compensation to be received by appellee, and the valuation placed upon the work ranged from $200, appellant's estimate, to $2,500, appellee's estimate. One witness valued the work at $1,500, another at $1,000. We find that the work was reasonably worth $400, the amount found by the court.
The only error presented by appellant is that the judgment is not supported by the testimony. It is admitted that there was testimony to support a much larger or a smaller judgment; but it is claimed, because no witness swore to the identical amount for which judgment was rendered, that it must, of necessity, be unsupported by the testimony. This position is untenable. When a jury is not demanded, and the case is tried by the judge, he has the prerogative enjoyed by the jury of passing upon the weight of the testimony and credibility of the witnesses. It is his duty, out of the conflict of the testimony, to evolve a fair and equitable judgment; and, between the extremes of the testimony as to amount, it is his privilege to select a sum that satisfies him of its justice. Scarcely a verdict in cases...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State Tax Commission v. United Verde Extension Mining Co.
... ... factors appearing in the testimony in any combination which ... is reasonable will be sustained by an appellate court ... Adams v. Cohn, (Tex. Civ. App.) 28 S.W ... 909; Houston, T. & L. Co. v. Hankins, (Tex ... Civ. App.) 200 S.W. 237 ... Section ... 3061, ... ...
-
Zachry v. McKown
...and it was the jury's province and privilege to select a sum as the actual value of the stock which to them was just. Adams v. Cohn. Tex.Civ.App., 28 S.W. 909, 910. There the court said: 'Scarcely a verdict in cases where the amount is in controversy could be approved if the jury was bound ......
-
State v. Littlefield
...amount" found by the jury. Appellants assignments and propositions on this point are without merit and are overruled. Adams v. Cohn, Tex. Civ.App., 28 S.W. 909; Houston Tie & Lumber Co. v. Hankins, Tex.Civ.App., 200 S.W. Appellants further contend that the trial court submitted an erroneous......