Hollowell v. Wark, Admx.

Indiana Court of Appeals

Hollowell v. Wark, Admx.

147 N.E. 170, 82 Ind. App. 618, 1925 Ind. App. LEXIS 261

Indiana Court of Appeals·Decided April 2, 1925·No. No. 12,234.·Published

Opinion

Nichols, J.

The only point which appellant undertakes to present is error of the court in admitting’ certain evidence. The only cause for a new-trial by which he undertakes to present this point is “for errors in admitting’ evidence to which defendant then and there excepted.”

Such an assignment presents no question. Causes for a new trial must be clear and specific so that the court will not need to search the record to find the alleged errors. Bayless v. Glenn (1880), 72 Ind. 5, 11; Staser v. Hogan (1889), 120 Ind. 207, 21 N. E. 911, 22 N. E. 990; Rees v. Blackwell (1893), 6 Ind. App. 506, 33 N. E. 938.

Affirmed.

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

Nichols, J.

The only point which appellant undertakes to present is error of the court in admitting’ certain evidence. The only cause for a new-trial by which he undertakes to present this point is “for errors in admitting’ evidence to which defendant then and there excepted.”

Such an assignment presents no question. Causes for a new trial must be clear and specific so that the court will not need to search the record to find the alleged errors. Bayless v. Glenn (1880), 72 Ind. 5, 11; Staser v. Hogan (1889), 120 Ind. 207, 21 N. E. 911, 22 N. E. 990; Rees v. Blackwell (1893), 6 Ind. App. 506, 33 N. E. 938.

Affirmed.

Hollowell v. Wark, Admx., 147 N.E. 170, 82 Ind. App. 618, 1925 Ind. App. LEXIS 261 (Ind. Ct. App. 1925).

Pincite

147 N.E. 170 (Hollowell v. Wark, Admx.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related