Seaver v. Seaver

148 N.E. 927, 83 Ind. App. 370, 1925 Ind. App. LEXIS 48
Indiana Court of Appeals·Decided July 1, 1925·No. No. 12,338.·Published

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Action by appellee against appellant wherein appellee seeks to recover from appellant a balancé of $1,200 of the purchase money of a certain tract of real estate. It is appellant’s contention, as appears by his affirmative answer, that said balance of $1,200 of the purchase price of such real estate was, by agreement of appellant and appellee, to be paid by him in the discharge of a certain mortgage upon another tract *371 of real estate owned by the appellee instead of paying the same in cash.

There was a trial by the court and a judgment in favor of the appellee. The only error assigned is the action of the court in overruling appellant’s motion for a new trial, the reasons properly assigned being that the decision of the court is not sustained by sufficient evidence, that it is contrary to law, and that appellant has newly-discovered evidence in the event of another trial.

While the evidence was conflicting, there was evidence that appellant agreed to pay the said sum of $1,200 in cash and this was sufficient to sustain the finding and judgment of the court in favor of the appellee.

As to the newly-discovered evidence, appellant wholly fails to show due diligence in discovering the new evidence, and such evidence was merely cumulative.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Seaver v. Seaver, 148 N.E. 927, 83 Ind. App. 370, 1925 Ind. App. LEXIS 48 (Ind. Ct. App. 1925).

148 N.E. 927 (Seaver v. Seaver) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.