Huckstep v. O'Hair

8 Ind. 253
Indiana Supreme Court·Decided December 1, 1856·Published·Cited by 8 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Action for the recovery of real estate. The question arose as to whether a conveyance was fraudulent; and the declarations of a person other than the grantee were offered in evidence againt the grantee, though he was not present when they were made.

The Circuit Court thought it had not been shown that a conspiracy or combination existed between the two, and refused the evidence.

Whether such combination had been shown was peculiarly a matter to be judged by the Circuit Court; and it would require a very strong case to induce this Court to disturb the judgment of the Circuit Court in a matter depending upon weight or effect of evidence. This, pertainly, is not such a case. . ..

The judgment is affirmed with costs.

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

Huckstep v. O'Hair, 8 Ind. 253 (Ind. 1856).

8 Ind. 253 (Huckstep v. O'Hair) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Hamilton v. Cooley
184 N.E. 568 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1933)
Doherty v. Holliday
32 N.E. 315 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1892)
Hunsinger v. Hofer
11 N.E. 463 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1887)
Terrell v. Butterfield
92 Ind. 1 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1883)
Hogue v. McClintock
76 Ind. 205 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1881)
Smith v. Freeman
71 Ind. 85 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1880)
Miller v. Insurance Co.
12 W. Va. 116 (West Virginia Supreme Court, 1877)
Boone County Bank v. Wallace
18 Ind. 82 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1862)