Hufton v. Hufton

• Decision Date: 06 November 1913
• Citation: 25 Idaho 96,136 P. 605
• Parties: HESTER B. HUFTON, Appellant, v. WILLIAM HUFTON, Respondent
• Court: Idaho Supreme Court

136 P. 605

25 Idaho 96

HESTER B. HUFTON, Appellant, v. WILLIAM HUFTON, Respondent

Supreme Court of Idaho

November 6, 1913

ACTION FOR DIVORCE-CONFLICT IN EVIDENCE.

1. Where there is a substantial conflict in evidence, the findings of fact and judgment based thereon will not be set aside on appeal.

APPEAL from the District Court of the Third Judicial District for Ada County. Hon. Charles P. McCarthy, Judge.

Action for divorce. Judgment for defendant. Affirmed.

Judgment affirmed, with costs in favor of the appellant.

Pence & Koelsch, for Appellant.

"The findings of fact must support the judgment, and if not, the judgment must be reversed." (Ponting v. Isaman, 7 Idaho 581, 65 P. 434.)

"There is not a substantial conflict in the evidence such as to bring it within the rule that where there is a substantial conflict in the evidence, the finding of the court will not be disturbed." (Wood v. Broderson, 12 Idaho 190, 85 P. 490.)

"In equity cases the appellate court will examine the evidence with a view to sustain the trial court in its findings and judgment, but will reverse the judgment if the evidence is insufficient to sustain it." (Small v. Harrington, 10 Idaho 499, 79 P. 461.)

D. T. Miller and Ira E. Barber, for Respondent.

Where there is substantial conflict in the evidence on which any finding of fact is based, such finding will not be disturbed on appeal. (Weeter Lumber Co. v. Fales, 20 Idaho 255, Ann. Cas. 1913A, 403, 118 P. 289; Blackfoot State Bank v. Crisler, 20 Idaho 379, 118 P. 775; Friedrich v. Donahue, 20 Idaho 92, 116 P. 1029; Thomason v. Lane-Potter Lumber Co., 20 Idaho 771, 119 P. 875; Coe v. McGran, 23 Idaho 582, 131 P. 1110; Griffith v. Griffith (Wash.), 133 P. 443.)

SULLIVAN, J. Ailshie, C. J., and Stewart, J., concur.

OPINION

SULLIVAN, J.

This action was brought by the appellant to obtain a divorce from the defendant. The action was tried by the court and findings of fact, conclusions of law and judgment entered in favor of the defendant. The appeal is from the judgment.

The only error assigned is the insufficiency of the evidence to support the findings and judgment. Upon a careful examination of the evidence we find there is a substantial conflict upon all of the material issues made by the pleadings. That being true, under the well-established rule of this court, the findings and judgment must be affirmed. (Friedrich v. Donahue, 20 Idaho 92, 116 P. 1029; Weeter Lumber Co. v. Fales, 20 Idaho 255, 118 P. 289, Ann. Cas. 1913A, 403, 118 P. 289; Blackfoot State Bank v. Crisler, 20 Idaho 379, 118 P. 775; Thomason v. Lane-Potter Lumber Co., 20 Idaho 771, 119 P. 875; Coe v. McGran, 23 Idaho 582, 131 P. 1110; Griffith v. Griffith (Wash.), 74 Wash. 284, 133 P. 443.)

The judgment must therefore be affirmed and it is so ordered, with costs in favor of the appellant.

Ailshie, C. J., and Stewart, J., concur.