Trimble v. Tantlinger
| Decision Date | 07 February 1898 |
| Citation | 74 N.W. 25,104 Iowa 665 |
| Parties | TRIMBLE v. TANTLINGER. |
| Court | Iowa Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Appeal from district court, Johnson county; M. J. Wade, Judge.Ranck & Bradley, Remley, Ney & Remley, and Joe A. Edwards, for appellant.
Ewing & Hart and S. H. Fairall, for appellee.
A rehearing having been granted in this case, we have again considered the questions involved, and have to say that we are quite satisfied with what was said in the former opinion (69 N. W. 1045) upon all the issues presented save as to the matter of newly-discovered evidence, and upon this branch of the case, in view of appellant's earnest and insistent claims, we desire to add something to what is there stated. In support of his application for a new trial on the ground of newly-discovered evidence, the defendant presented certain affidavits. The first is an affidavit of George Miller, who avers that one James Evans, who was a witness for plaintiff on the trial below, and there testified to having heard the words complained of spoken, stated to affiant before said trial “that he could not do Tantlinger any harm, nor Trimble any good, in the case, and that he never heard Tantlinger say anything against the character of Mr. Trimble.” Thomas Jordan also makes affidavit that he was present during a conversation between plaintiff and defendant in the store of Leonard & Ritter, in the spring of 1894, and he adds: “I did not hear Tantlinger say that Trimble kept a house of ill fame, or a whore house, or a place where girls resort for prostitution, at this time or any other time.” John White swears that he never heard defendant say that Trimble kept a house of ill fame, or that he kept a piano to entice girls there for bad purposes. W. S. Stout in his affidavit says that after the verdict was rendered in the court below he heard James Evans say to another person: Henry C. Lane testifies that James Evans, in a conversation with affiant, said, in substance, that he never heard Tantlinger say that Trimble was keeping a house of ill fame, or whore house, or a place where girls or women resorted, and that he never heard defendant say anything about Trimble, or about the kind of house he was keeping; that Evans did say: “The suit was brought for spite, on account of liquor prosecutions, or for intimidation.” In resistance to the application for a new trial, plaintiff filed, among others, the affidavits of James Evans, who denies specifically the statements attributed to him in the above-mentioned affidavits. The negative matter testified to by Jordan and White would be inadmissible, if offered in evidence. It...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Duty v. Chesapeake & O. Ry. Co.
...not being able to see that there was it is our duty to overrule the point. 29 Cyc. 904; Trimble v. Tantlinger, 104 Iowa 665, 69 N.W. 1045, 74 N.W. 25; Thompson v. 88 Cal. 110, 25 P. 962; Goodell v. Hall, 112 Ga. 435, 37 S.E. 725; Grace v. McKinney, 112 Ga. 425, 37 S.E. 737. Finding no subst......
-
In re Rapier Sugar Feed Co.
...is of slight value and is easily overcome by positive testimony of the fact. Killen v. Lide's Adm'x, 65 Ala. 505, 508; Trimble v. Tantlinger, 104 Iowa, 665, 74 N.W. 25, 69 N.W. There is no positive evidence in this case contradicting or impeaching the testimony of the auctioneer that other ......
-
Becker v. Inc. Town of Churdan
...The following authorities support our decision on this point: Rockwell v. Ketchum, 149 Iowa, 515, 128 N. W. 940;Trimble v. Tantlinger, 104 Iowa, 665, 74 N. W. 25, 69 N. W. 1045;Savings Bank v. Kent, 135 Iowa, 386, 112 N. W. 767. [11] VI. A great number of errors are assigned on the admissio......
-
Rockwell v. Ketchum
...evidence is largely discretionary. Woerdehoff v. Muekel, 131 Iowa, 300, 108 N. W. 533;Trimble v. Tautlinger, 104 Iowa, 665, 69 N. W. 1045, 74 N. W. 25;Clark v. Van Vleck, 135 Iowa, 194, 112 N. W. 648. It ought not to be granted unless the newly discovered evidence is such as likely will lea......