Cleland v. Thornton
JOHN S. CLELAND v. HENRY THORNTON and J. WILLIAMS
Headnotes
Summary
Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
By the Court, Crockett, J.:
There was no error in the ruling of the Court admitting the evidence as to the cost of new buildings to replace those which were burned. The evidence was admissible as furnishing some data by which the Court would be enabled to estimate approximately the valué of the old buildings; and it is evident from the opinion and order of the Court, that it *439 was received and considered for this purpose only, and not as affording a criterion of damages. The evidence as to the character of the timber for milling purposes in that immediate neighborhood was also admissible under the pleadings, when it was offered. But, whether strictly admissible or not, it is apparent from the findings, and from the opinion and order of the Court denying a new trial, that it did the defendants no harm. Nor can we disturb the judgment on the ground that the findings were not justified by the evidence, which was quite sufficient to warrant the conclusion that the damage to the plaintiff’s property was caused by the negligence of the defendants, as charged in the complaint.
Judgment affirmed.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 8 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
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.