Ball v. State
This text of 18 Ind. 362 (Ball v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Indiana Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Action by the appellee against the appellant upon an administration bond. Trial by the Court; finding and judgment for the plaintiff.
An error complained of is, that the Court improperly continued the cause from one term to another on the application of the plaintiff. We have not examined as to the correctness of the continuance, as, if it was wrong, the judgment after-wards obtained, should not, for that cause, be reversed. It can not be, that an error committed in continuing a cause will prevent a valid judgment from being afterwards rendered. [363]*363If so, such a continuance must, sooner or later, put the plaintiff effectually out of Court, for any judgment he might after-wards obtain, however right and proper in itself, would have to be reversed.
The only other point made is, that, the evidence is not sufficient to sustain the finding. The evidence is such that, under the repeated rulings of this Court, we -do not feel author-' ized to interfere; it tends to sustain the finding.
The judgment below is affirmed, with costs and one per cent, damages.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
18 Ind. 362, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ball-v-state-ind-1862.