Hottle v. Kindle
8 Blackf. 295
This text of 8 Blackf. 295 (Hottle v. Kindle) 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.
Bluebook
Hottle v. Kindle, 8 Blackf. 295 (Ind. 1846).
Opinion
THAT one of two plaintiffs in error is under a disability, is no answer to a plea of the statute of limitations to the writ of error. Shannon et al. v. Dunn et al., May term, 1846.
The statute in such case cannot be evaded by procuring a severance as to the plaintiff in error who is not under a disability.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
8 Blackf. 295, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hottle-v-kindle-ind-1846.