Stooksberry v. Lingwiler

(after stating the case as above).

The contention of the Stooksberrys is that the trial court committed error entitling them to a reversal of the judgment and a new trial of the cause when he peremptorily instructed the jury to return a verdict in Lingwiler’s favor, and, such a verdict ¡having been returned, rendered judgment accordingly. As we understand them (the Stooksberrys), they are not in the attitude of denying a right in the court to instruct the jury as he did, unless the jury might have found that the Federal Mortgage Company at the time it loaned $8,000 to them (the Stooksberrys)…