Ernest v. Grand Trunk Western Railway Co.

Indiana Court of Appeals

Ernest v. Grand Trunk Western Railway Co.

72 N.E. 1136, 34 Ind. App. 409, 1905 Ind. App. LEXIS 10

CourtIndiana Court of Appeals

DecidedJanuary 10, 1905

DocketNo. 5,303

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 72 N.E. 1136 (Ernest v. Grand Trunk Western Railway Co.) 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

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

Pincite

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

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.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

72 N.E. 1136, 34 Ind. App. 409, 1905 Ind. App. LEXIS 10, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ernest-v-grand-trunk-western-railway-co-indctapp-1905.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack