Claxton v. James
Opinion
If the mule levied upon in this case was the mule included in the plaintiff’s mortgage, the judgment should have been in favor, of the plaintiff; on the other hand, if it was not the same mule, the judgment for the claimant should stand. The case, therefore, turns solely upon a question of identity, which is essentially a question of fact; and, there being evidence pro and con, this- court has no jurisdiction to overrule the finding of the trial court on this issue, although the evidence does seem strongly to preponderate against the finding.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
70 S.E. 1124 (Claxton v. James) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.