Fleming v. Stout

19 Ind. 328
Indiana Supreme Court·Decided November 15, 1862·Published·Cited by 6 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

A complaint for review will not lie, under the code, for newly discovered evidence.

Such a complaint lies for newly discovered material matter, and for errors of law appearing on the face of the decree. 2 R. S. 280. Nelson v. Johnson, 18 Ind.

But “errors in form only, though apparent on the face of the decree, and mere matter of abatement, seem not to” be grounds for review. Ad. Eq., side p., 416. Query: Is an erroneous decision, upon the weight of evidence, which appears in the record, an error of law appearing in the proceedings, within the rule authorizing a review for error of law? See Ad. Eq., side p. 417, note.

The judgment is affirmed, with costs.

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

Fleming v. Stout, 19 Ind. 328 (Ind. 1862).

19 Ind. 328 (Fleming v. Stout) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Trust & Savings Bank v. Brusnahan
147 N.E. 168 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1925)
State ex rel. Turner v. Circuit Court for Ozaukee County
38 N.W. 192 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1888)
Hines v. Driver
100 Ind. 315 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1885)
George v. George
67 Ala. 192 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1880)
Worley v. Town of Ellettsville
60 Ind. 7 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1877)
Webster v. Maiden
41 Ind. 124 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1872)