Erwine v. Scotten
This text of 38 Ind. 289 (Erwine v. Scotten) 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.
Opinion
This suit was brought on a promissory note by the appellee against William P. Erwine, Edwin Erwine, and William Conner. The process was returned served on William P. Erwine and William Conner, but Edwin Erwine was not found, which was noticed on the record. There was a trial had and a judgment rendered against William P. Erwine and William Conner, and William P. Erwine only prayed and took an appeal. He has not given notic'e to his co-defendant of the appeal, and the appeal must be dismissed. 2 G. & H. 270; Kirby v. Holmes, 6 Ind. 33; Kain v. Gradon, 6 Blackf. 138; and Wickham, v. Hess, ante, p. 183.
The appeal is dismissed, at the costs of the appellant, Erwine.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
38 Ind. 289, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/erwine-v-scotten-ind-1871.