DocketNumber: No. 27,614.
Judges: PER CURIAM.
Filed Date: 12/6/1929
Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 11/10/2024
Plaintiff brought suit for the balance due for rent. The amount due therefor is conceded. Defendant asserted that the cost of the windmill, the fencing and the well should be credited thereon. The court credited thereon the cost of the windmill and fencing and the cost of the iron pipe installed in the well. The only question involved in this appeal is whether defendant is also entitled to credit for the cost of digging the well. Defendant concedes that under the evidence the court could have refused to allow anything on account of the well but insists that if any allowance was made therefor the entire cost of the well should have been allowed. The court allowed defendant for everything which defendant could have removed from the farm, and we cannot say that the court erred to defendant's prejudice in holding that such was the intention of the parties.
The order denying a new trial is affirmed. *Page 626