Stone-Lowe Cotton Co. v. Weil Bros.

Citations

• 129 Miss. 60
• 91 So. 859

Syllabus

<p>1. Tktal. In action involving question as to what was the contract, the court’s amending the verdict toy inserting the amount shown clue by undisputed evidence' is not error.</p> <p>Where the issue between the plaintiff and the defendant is whether the contract on which plaintiff declared is the real contract or whether the real contract is one set up by the defendant, the contract not being in writing, and the jury accepts the plaintiff’s version of what the contract was. and where the plaintiffs evidence as to the grade and weight of the cotton involved in the contract is not disputed in the evidence, and -the jury finds for the plaintiff,' not specifying the amount in their finding, it is not error for the court to put the verdict in form by inserting the amount shown by the undisputed evidence to be due the plaintiff; his version of the contract being adopted by the jury in its finding as to the contract.</p> <p>2. Appeal and Ebeoe. Where there was no dispute as to grades and weights, instruction to find for plaintiff if the grades and weights did not come up to the contract was harmless.</p> <p>It is not reversible error in such case to instruct the jury “that if you believe from the preponderance of the evidence in the case that Weil Bros, bought the cotton involved in this suit from the defendants on the contract prices, the contract grades, and the contract weights as set out in plaintiff’s declaration, and that said cotton failed to come up to said contract either in grades or weights, or both, then you will find for the plaintiff’s and assess their damages the amount sued for,” there being no dispute as to the facts as to grades or weights as testified to by the plaintiff, the latter part of the instruction is harmless error.</p>