Richards v. Lucero., 3520.

• Citation: 35 N.M. 356,298 P. 662
• Decision Date: 28 March 1931
• Docket Number: No. 3520.,3520.
• Parties: RICHARDSv.LUCERO.
• Court: Supreme Court of New Mexico

35 N.M. 356

298 P. 662

RICHARDS

v.LUCERO.

No. 3520.

Supreme Court of New Mexico.

March 28, 1931.

Syllabus by the Court.

Credibility of witnesses and weight of evidence are questions for jury.

Credibility of witnesses and weight of evidence is for the jury.

Appeal from District Court, Santa Fé County; Holloman, Judge.

Suit by A. Richards against Alfredo Lucero, wherein defendant filed a cross-complaint. From the judgment rendered, plaintiff appeals.

Affirmed, and cause remanded.

Credibility of witnesses and the weight of their testimony are for the jury alone.

R. P. Fullerton and Willis N. Birdsall, both of Santa Fé, for appellee.

McIntosh & Chavez and E. P. Davies, all of Santa Fé, for appellee.

WATSON, J.

Appellant, as assignee of a judgment rendered against appellee March 8, 1923, sued to revive it. By cross-complaint appellee sued appellant for abuse of process, alleging that, after the judgment in question had become dormant, appellant had sued out execution thereon, and, by levying the same upon appellee's stock of merchandise, had occasioned the latter damage.

The trial court, upon findings, concluded that appellant was entitled to a renewal of his judgment in the sum of $552.98, and that appellee was entitled to $750 damages on his cross-complaint. Judgment was rendered on the cross-complaint for the excess.

Appellant's only contention here is that the damages awarded for abuse of process are excessive. He admits that, if appellee's story be taken at face value, he cannot escape the substantial evidence rule. Whether this witness told the truth was a question for the trial court.

The judgment must be affirmed. The cause will be remanded.

It is so ordered.

SADLER and PARKER, JJ., concur. BICKLEY, C. J., and HUDSPETH, J., did not participate.