Egbert v. Egbert

Indiana Court of Appeals

Egbert v. Egbert

95 N.E.2d 637, 120 Ind. App. 670, 1950 Ind. App. LEXIS 227

CourtIndiana Court of Appeals

DecidedDecember 21, 1950

Docket18,028

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 95 N.E.2d 637 (Egbert v. Egbert) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Indiana Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Egbert v. Egbert, 95 N.E.2d 637, 120 Ind. App. 670, 1950 Ind. App. LEXIS 227 (Ind. Ct. App. 1950).

Pincite

Opinion

Royse, J.

— This is the second appeal in this case. Originally it was tried in the Noble Circuit Court where there was a finding in favor of appellees. On appeal we affirmed that judgment. The Supreme Court, on appellant’s petition, transferred the case and reversed the judgment of the Noble Circuit Court. Egbert v. Egbert et al. (1948), 226 Ind. 346, 80 N. E. 2d 104. Subsequently the case was retried in the Huntington Circuit Court. On substantially the same evidence that court again found in favor of appellees. On this appeal sub *671 stantially the same questions are presented as were before this court on the original appeal.

Right or wrong, under a long line of decisions of both this court and the Supreme Court, the decision of the Supreme Court cited above establishes the law of this case. Biesbeck Drug Company v. Wray, Administratrix (1942), 111 Ind. App. 467, 39 N. E. 2d 776 (transfer denied) ; Daugherty et al. v. Daugherty et al. (1949), 119 Ind. App. 180, 83 N. E. 2d 485.

Therefore, the judgment must be reversed, with instructions to sustain appellant’s motion for a new trial.

Note. — Reported in 95 N. E. 2d 637.

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

Royse, J.

— This is the second appeal in this case. Originally it was tried in the Noble Circuit Court where there was a finding in favor of appellees. On appeal we affirmed that judgment. The Supreme Court, on appellant’s petition, transferred the case and reversed the judgment of the Noble Circuit Court. Egbert v. Egbert et al. (1948), 226 Ind. 346, 80 N. E. 2d 104. Subsequently the case was retried in the Huntington Circuit Court. On substantially the same evidence that court again found in favor of appellees. On this appeal sub *671 stantially the same questions are presented as were before this court on the original appeal.

Right or wrong, under a long line of decisions of both this court and the Supreme Court, the decision of the Supreme Court cited above establishes the law of this case. Biesbeck Drug Company v. Wray, Administratrix (1942), 111 Ind. App. 467, 39 N. E. 2d 776 (transfer denied) ; Daugherty et al. v. Daugherty et al. (1949), 119 Ind. App. 180, 83 N. E. 2d 485.

Therefore, the judgment must be reversed, with instructions to sustain appellant’s motion for a new trial.

Note. — Reported in 95 N. E. 2d 637.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

95 N.E.2d 637, 120 Ind. App. 670, 1950 Ind. App. LEXIS 227, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/egbert-v-egbert-indctapp-1950.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack