Ernest v. Grand Trunk Western Railway Co.

72 N.E. 1136, 34 Ind. App. 409, 1905 Ind. App. LEXIS 10
Indiana Court of Appeals·Decided January 10, 1905·No. No. 5,303·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

Robinson, P. J.

Transferred from the Supreme Court under the act of March 12, 1901.

1. To the first, third, fourth and fifth paragraphs of appellant’s complaint a separate demurrer was overruled, and to the second paragraph, was sustained. An exception was reserved by appellant. The only error assigned is sustaining this demurrer. The final entry is the ruling on the demurrer. The record does not disclose that further proceedings of any kind were had in the trial court. The error assigned presents no question, for the reason that the record does not show that final judgment was rendered (§644 Bums 1901, §632 R. S. 1881), and the ruling questioned is not within the exceptions to the general statute authorizing appeals (§658 Bums 1901, §646 R. S. 1881). Sustaining a demurrer to a complaint is not a final judgment from which an appeal will lie. Slagle v. Bodmer (1877), 58 Ind. 465; State, ex rel., v. Herod (1898), 21 Ind. App. 177, and cases cited; James v. Lake Erie, etc., R. Co. (1896), 144 Ind. 630, and cases cited; Ewbank’s Manual, §82; Elliott, App. Proc., §81.

Appeal dismissed.

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

Ernest v. Grand Trunk Western Railway Co., 72 N.E. 1136, 34 Ind. App. 409, 1905 Ind. App. LEXIS 10 (Ind. Ct. App. 1905).

72 N.E. 1136 (Ernest v. Grand Trunk Western Railway Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Thomas v. O'connell's Estate
41 N.E.2d 656 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1942)
Taylor Washing Machine Co. v. Lamere
185 N.E. 660 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1933)
O'Neill v. Johnson
95 N.E. 229 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1911)
Neyens v. Flesher
79 N.E. 1087 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1907)