Cook v. Otto

Indiana Supreme Court

Cook v. Otto

13 Ind. 380

DecidedNovember 15, 1859

StatusPublished

This text of 13 Ind. 380 (Cook v. Otto) 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.

Bluebook

Cook v. Otto, 13 Ind. 380 (Ind. 1859).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The record shows that Otto and Davis, at the April term, 1858, of the Vanderburgh Circuit Court, recovered a judgment in that Court against the appellants, who were the defendants, and that afterwards, at the same term, the defendants, upon affidavit, moved for a new trial in the cause in which judgment was rendered, which motion the Court overruled. And from the decision of the Court in overruling said motion, the defendants took this appeal.

G. Denby and J. Lunkenheimer, for the appellants.- C. Baker, for the appellees.

The appeal thus taken must be dismissed. The statute does not authorize an appeal from an order of the Court refusing or granting a new trial, especially when such order is made at the term at which the cause in which such order was made was tried. The party, to avail himself of an error in refusing a motion for a new trial, must appeal from the final judgment in the cause to which his motion applies. 2 R. S. pp. 158,162, §§ 550, 576.

The appeal is dismissed with costs.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Per Curiam.

The record shows that Otto and Davis, at the April term, 1858, of the Vanderburgh Circuit Court, recovered a judgment in that Court against the appellants, who were the defendants, and that afterwards, at the same term, the defendants, upon affidavit, moved for a new trial in the cause in which judgment was rendered, which motion the Court overruled. And from the decision of the Court in overruling said motion, the defendants took this appeal.

G. Denby and J. Lunkenheimer, for the appellants.- C. Baker, for the appellees.

The appeal thus taken must be dismissed. The statute does not authorize an appeal from an order of the Court refusing or granting a new trial, especially when such order is made at the term at which the cause in which such order was made was tried. The party, to avail himself of an error in refusing a motion for a new trial, must appeal from the final judgment in the cause to which his motion applies. 2 R. S. pp. 158,162, §§ 550, 576.

The appeal is dismissed with costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

13 Ind. 380, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cook-v-otto-ind-1859.