Cross v. Cross

59 N.E. 1049, 156 Ind. 378, 1901 Ind. LEXIS 54
Indiana Supreme Court·Decided March 27, 1901·No. No. 18,930·Published

Opinion

Monks, J.

Appellant brought this action to contest the will of Jacob Cross, deceased. This appeal was taken under §642 Burns 1894, §630 R. S. 1881 and Horner 1897, which provides for reserving questions of law decided by the court during the progress of the trial for the decision of the Supreme. Court. . . . ..

It is insisted by appellant that the court erred in giving certain instructions to the jury. No moti.on for .a new trial was made in [he court below. It is settled that unless an alleged error occurring during the progress of the trial is presented to the trial court as a ground for a new trial, .the same can not. be considered on appeal. The rule applies to questions of law reserved upon the trial under §642 (630), supra, as well as to questions reserved upon the trial under the general rules of practice authorized by the.code. Conner v. Town of Marion, 112 Ind. 517, 520, 521; Rousseau v. Corey, 62 Ind. 250; Starner v. State, 61 Ind. 360; Love v. Carpenter, 30 Ind. 284; Garver v. Daubenspeck, 22 Ind. 238; Ewbank’s Manual, §§44, 96, pp. 65, 66, 134.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Cross v. Cross, 59 N.E. 1049, 156 Ind. 378, 1901 Ind. LEXIS 54 (Ind. 1901).

59 N.E. 1049 (Cross v. Cross) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Garver v. Daubenspeck
22 Ind. 238 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1864)
Love v. Carpenter
30 Ind. 284 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1868)
Starner v. State, ex rel. Morford
61 Ind. 360 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1878)
Rousseau v. Corey
62 Ind. 250 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1878)
Conner v. Town of Marion
14 N.E. 488 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1887)