TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Campbell v. Bank & Trust Co.

W. E. CAMPBELL v. THE BANK & TRUST CO., a Corporation, and W. H. RALPH

Campbell v. Bank & Trust Co., 141 P. 1102 (Idaho 1914)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Idaho Supreme Court · State Highest Courts
Decided
June 23, 1914
Judges
Ailshie, Sullivan
Citations
141 P. 110226 Idaho 2011914 Ida. LEXIS 63
Disposition
Affirmed.
Headnotes
Evidence — Sufficiency of. 1. Seld, that the evidence is sufficient to support the findings.
Summary
APPEAL from the District Court of the Second Judicial District, in and for Nez Perce County. Hon. E. C. Steele, Judge. Action to have certain conveyances of real estate and certain transfers of personal property canceled and held for naught. Judgment for defendants. If the court should find even that there is only a substantial controversy in the evidence as to whether the findings made by the court below are true, it would be necessary to affirm the judgment, since an appellate court will not reverse findings of fact of the lower court where there is a substantial controversy in the evidence, even though the appellate court may believe the court below was wrong. (Dearwig v. HocJcersmith, 25 Ida. 140, 136 Pac. 994, syllabus No. 5, and eases cited.)

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Sullivan

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

SULLIVAN, J.

This action was brought to have certain deeds to real property and transfers of personal property which were executed by the appellant to the defendant bank set aside and canceled, and the ground relied upon for such relief was duress in the execution of said deeds and the transfer of said personal property.

The issues being joined by the answer, the cause was tried by the court and findings of fact made and judgment entered in favor of the defendants.

Several errors are assigned, but the main error is the insufficiency of the evidence to support the findings.

Upon an examination of the evidence, we are satisfied that it is amply sufficient to sustain the findings and that no prejudicial errors at law were committed by the court in the trial of the case.

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

Ailshie, C. J., concurs.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1916: 119162026peak 1916 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Interstate Compress Co. v. Arthur1916 OK 150, 155 P. 861

Most recent

  1. Interstate Compress Co. v. Arthur1916 OK 150, 155 P. 861

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list