From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Robison v. Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen I. Dept

Supreme Court of Arizona
Apr 21, 1952
243 P.2d 472 (Ariz. 1952)

Opinion

No. 5178.

April 21, 1952.

Appeal from the Superior Court of Pima County, J. Mercer Johnson, J.

Holmes Morrison, Tucson, for appellants.

Darnell, Robertson Holesapple, Tucson, for appellee.


The appellee timely filed a motion for rehearing upon four specific grounds. The first three are without merit as they present nothing more than a reiteration of matters fully covered in our original opinion. The fourth ground is that we erred in the concluding paragraph of the opinion by directing the trial court "to enter judgment for the plaintiff as prayed for in their complaint", for the reason that this would deprive the defendant (appellee) of its day in court by not permitting it to offer evidence in support of its defense upon the issues as made out by the pleadings. The attorney for appellant graciously concedes the correctness of appellee's contention in this respect.

We therefore grant the motion for rehearing upon the last ground stated and modify our previous opinion by striking the concluding paragraph and substituting therefor the following, viz.:

It therefore follows that the order of the lower court granting the motion to dismiss was in error, and for the foregoing reasons the judgment of the lower court is reversed with directions to grant a new trial.

In all other respects the prior opinion is reaffirmed.

UDALL, C.J., and STANFORD, PHELPS and LA PRADE, JJ., and FARLEY, Superior Court Judge, concur.


Summaries of

Robison v. Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen I. Dept

Supreme Court of Arizona
Apr 21, 1952
243 P.2d 472 (Ariz. 1952)
Case details for

Robison v. Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen I. Dept

Case Details

Full title:ROBISON et ux. v. BROTHERHOOD OF RAILROAD TRAINMEN INS. DEPARTMENT, Inc

Court:Supreme Court of Arizona

Date published: Apr 21, 1952

Citations

243 P.2d 472 (Ariz. 1952)
243 P.2d 472

Citing Cases

Radkowsky v. Provident Life Accident Insurance

Nothing in these clauses, however, changes the requirement that the disability must begin after the…