First National Bank v. Davisson

Indiana Court of Appeals

First National Bank v. Davisson

128 N.E. 934, 74 Ind. App. 300, 1920 Ind. App. LEXIS 238

CourtIndiana Court of Appeals

DecidedDecember 8, 1920

DocketNo. 10,482

StatusPublished

This text of 128 N.E. 934 (First National Bank v. Davisson) 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

First National Bank v. Davisson, 128 N.E. 934, 74 Ind. App. 300, 1920 Ind. App. LEXIS 238 (Ind. Ct. App. 1920).

Pincite

Opinion

McMahan, J. —

This is an action by appellee Harvey Davisson against James Porter, in which the First National Bank of Rensselaer was made a garnishee defendant. The appellant claiming to be the owner of the funds in the possession of the appellee bank was on its application- made a defendant. Trial by the court resulted in a judgment for the appellee Davisson on the issue presented by the complaint and also on the issue in attachment and garnishment.

The questions presented by the assignment of errors require a consideration of the evidence. Appellant’s recital of the evidence is not sufficient to enable the court to pass upon the questions involved. Appellant contends that it is the owner of the funds garnisheed by reason of an alleged indorsement of a certain promissory note to it by appellee Porter. Neither the note nor the indorsement are set out, and in the absence of this evidence no error is shown. Judgment affirmed.

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

McMahan, J. —

This is an action by appellee Harvey Davisson against James Porter, in which the First National Bank of Rensselaer was made a garnishee defendant. The appellant claiming to be the owner of the funds in the possession of the appellee bank was on its application- made a defendant. Trial by the court resulted in a judgment for the appellee Davisson on the issue presented by the complaint and also on the issue in attachment and garnishment.

The questions presented by the assignment of errors require a consideration of the evidence. Appellant’s recital of the evidence is not sufficient to enable the court to pass upon the questions involved. Appellant contends that it is the owner of the funds garnisheed by reason of an alleged indorsement of a certain promissory note to it by appellee Porter. Neither the note nor the indorsement are set out, and in the absence of this evidence no error is shown. Judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

128 N.E. 934, 74 Ind. App. 300, 1920 Ind. App. LEXIS 238, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/first-national-bank-v-davisson-indctapp-1920.