Collins v. Hibbard

Decision Date31 July 1929
Docket Number5262
Citation48 Idaho 178,279 P. 619
PartiesJESS F. COLLINS, Appellant, v. INGABOR HIBBARD, Respondent
CourtIdaho Supreme Court

APPEAL AND ERROR-CONFLICTING EVIDENCE-FINDINGS UNDISTURBED.

Where there was sufficient substantial evidence to support court's finding, supreme court has no alternative than to affirm decree based upon conflicting testimony on all essential issues raised by pleadings.

APPEAL from the District Court of the Tenth Judicial District, for Nez Perce County. Hon. Miles S. Johnson, Judge.

Action to have plaintiff decreed to be owner of one-half of certain property or for proportionate share of value thereof. Judgment for defendant. Affirmed.

Judgment affirmed. Costs to respondent.

Verner R. Clements and John W. Cramer, for Appellant.

A judgment will be reversed where there is no substantial evidence to sustain it. (Keltner v. Bundy, 40 Idaho 402, 233 P. 516; Taylor v. Fluharty, 35 Idaho 705 208 P. 866; Geerhart v. Federal Land & Securities Co., 35 Idaho 137, 204 P. 1072; McDonnell v Jones, 25 Idaho 551, 138 P. 1123.)

Where the findings of fact are not supported by the evidence, the judgment cannot be upheld. (Van Meter v. Zumwalt, 35 Idaho 235, 206 P. 507.)

In order to affirm a judgment there must be some competent evidence to support the findings. (Wolf v Eagleson, 29 Idaho 177, 157 P. 1122.)

Tannahill & Leeper, for Respondent.

Where there is a substantial conflict in the testimony, the court will not disturb the findings of the trial court. ( Morton v. Whitson, 45 Idaho 28, 260 P. 426; Hooker v. Schuler, 45 Idaho 83, 260 P. 1027; Todd v. City of Hailey, 45 Idaho 175, 260 P. 1092; Hayes v. Independent School Dist., 45 Idaho 464, 262 P. 862.)

BUDGE, C. J. Givens, T. Bailey Lee, Wm. E. Lee and Varian, JJ., concur.

OPINION

BUDGE, C. J.

On or about December 9, 1921, appellant entered into an agreement for the purchase of lot 10, block 1, North Park Place Addition to the city of Lewiston. Under the terms of the contract of purchase appellant paid the vendors on the date the contract was made, $ 400. The balance of the purchase price, $ 600, was to be paid on or before June 9, 1922. On or about March 1, 1922, appellant made an agreement with respondent whereby the latter paid to appellant's vendors the $ 600 due on his contract with them, and by agreement between appellant and respondent a deed to the property was taken in the name of respondent. Thereafter, appellant commenced the construction of an apartment house on the property, towards which respondent contributed certain sums of money at various times. It also appears that upon different occasions appellant turned over to respondent certain money, checks and Liberty bonds, the proceeds of which were either repaid to appellant or paid out by respondent to cover expenses in connection with the construction of the building. Appellant furnished building materials and also made payments on the building, and performed labor thereon during the course of its construction. The transactions carried on between appellant and respondent were not altogether businesslike. All available funds of the parties having been exhausted, liens were filed against the building and numerous debts were incurred which were outstanding and unpaid. In this situation, on November 6, 1922, appellant executed and delivered to respondent a receipt acknowledging full payment and satisfaction of all claims and demands held by him against the premises involved and of all claims against respondent for labor and materials furnished in the construction of the building. On December 8, 1922, appellant and his wife executed and delivered to respondent a quitclaim deed conveying thereby the above-described premises, which instrument was duly recorded. Appellant testified that the receipt and deed were given by him to enable respondent to secure a loan on the premises in order to discharge the liens and other indebtedness against the building. Respondent's testimony was to the contrary, and the court found on this conflicting evidence:

"That . . . . on or about the 6th day of November, 1922, the plaintiff (appellant) agreed to transfer the said premises to the defendant (respondent) in full satisfaction of the amount due her from him for money advanced . . . . in return for which the said defendant agreed to release the plaintiff from any and all liability to her for...

To continue reading

Request your trial
4 cases
  • Maher v. Gentry
    • United States
    • Idaho Supreme Court
    • November 21, 1947
    ... ... Summers, 35 Idaho 182, 209 P. 454; Davenport v ... Burke, 30 Idaho 599, 167 P. 481; Lus v ... Pecararo, 41 Idaho 425, 238 P. 1021; Collins v ... Hibbard, 48 Idaho 178, 279 P. 619; Snell v ... Stickler, 50 Idaho 648, 299 P. 1080; State v ... Snoderly, 61 Idaho 314, 101 P.2d 9; Roddy ... ...
  • McCarty v. Sauer
    • United States
    • Idaho Supreme Court
    • March 25, 1943
    ... ... ( Berding v ... Northwestern Securities Co. , 36 Idaho 384, 211 P. 62; ... Robertson v. Moore , 10 Idaho 115, 77 P. 218; ... Collins v. [64 Idaho 757] Hibbard , 48 Idaho ... 178, 279 P. 619; Dearing v. Hockersmith , 25 Idaho ... 140, 136 P. 994; Davenport v. Burke , 30 Idaho ... ...
  • Lingenfelter v. Eby, 7375
    • United States
    • Idaho Supreme Court
    • February 18, 1948
    ... ... Summers, 35 Idaho 182, 209 P. 454; Davenport v ... Burke, 30 Idaho 599, 167 P. 481; Lus v ... Pecararo, 41 Idaho 425, 238 P. 1021; Collins v ... Hibbard, 48 Idaho 178, 279 P. 619 ... Holden, ... Justice. Givens, C. J., Miller and Hyatt, JJ., and Sutphen, ... District ... ...
  • Reynolds Irr. Dist. v. Sproat
    • United States
    • Idaho Supreme Court
    • March 27, 1948
    ... ... 454; Davenport v ... Burke, 30 Idaho 599, 167 P. 481; Lus v ... Pecararo, 41 Idaho 425, 238 P. 1021; Collins v ... Hibbard, 48 Idaho 178, 279 P. 619; Snell v ... Stickler, 50 Idaho 648, 299 P. 1080; State v ... Snoderly, 61 Idaho 314, 101 P.2d 9; ... ...

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT