Hufton v. Hufton

Idaho Supreme Court

Hufton v. Hufton

136 P. 605, 25 Idaho 96, 1913 Ida. LEXIS 14

CourtIdaho Supreme Court

DecidedNovember 6, 1913

StatusPublished

Cited by6 cases

This text of 136 P. 605 (Hufton v. Hufton) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Idaho Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Hufton v. Hufton, 136 P. 605, 25 Idaho 96, 1913 Ida. LEXIS 14 (Idaho 1913).

Pincite

Opinion

SULLIVAN, J.

This action was brought by the appellant to obtain a divorce from the defendant. The action was tried by the court and findings of fact, conclusions of law and judgment entered in favor of the defendant. The appeal is from the judgment.

The only error assigned is the insufficiency of the evidence to support the findings and judgment. Upon a careful examination of the evidence we find there is a substantial conflict upon all of the material issues made by the pleadings. That being true, under the well-established rule of this court, the findings and judgment must be affirmed. (Friedrich v. Donahue, 20 Ida. 92, 116 Pac. 1029; Weeter Lumber Co. v. Fales, 20 Ida. 255, Ann. Cas. 1913A, 403, 118 Pac. 289; Blackfoot State Bank v. Crisler, 20 Ida. 379, 118 Pac. 775; Thomason v. Lane-Potter Lumber Co., 20 Ida. 771, 119 Pac. 875; Coe v. McGran, 23 Ida. 582, 131 Pac. 1110; Griffith v. Griffith (Wash.), 133 Pac. 443.)

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

Ailshie, C. J., and Stewart, J., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

SULLIVAN, J.

This action was brought by the appellant to obtain a divorce from the defendant. The action was tried by the court and findings of fact, conclusions of law and judgment entered in favor of the defendant. The appeal is from the judgment.

The only error assigned is the insufficiency of the evidence to support the findings and judgment. Upon a careful examination of the evidence we find there is a substantial conflict upon all of the material issues made by the pleadings. That being true, under the well-established rule of this court, the findings and judgment must be affirmed. (Friedrich v. Donahue, 20 Ida. 92, 116 Pac. 1029; Weeter Lumber Co. v. Fales, 20 Ida. 255, Ann. Cas. 1913A, 403, 118 Pac. 289; Blackfoot State Bank v. Crisler, 20 Ida. 379, 118 Pac. 775; Thomason v. Lane-Potter Lumber Co., 20 Ida. 771, 119 Pac. 875; Coe v. McGran, 23 Ida. 582, 131 Pac. 1110; Griffith v. Griffith (Wash.), 133 Pac. 443.)

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

Ailshie, C. J., and Stewart, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

136 P. 605, 25 Idaho 96, 1913 Ida. LEXIS 14, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hufton-v-hufton-idaho-1913.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack