Indiana, Bloomington & Western Railway Co. v. McBroom

98 Ind. 167, 1884 Ind. LEXIS 526
CourtIndiana Supreme Court
DecidedJune 17, 1884
DocketNo. 11,165
StatusPublished
Cited by6 cases

This text of 98 Ind. 167 (Indiana, Bloomington & Western Railway Co. v. McBroom) 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
Indiana, Bloomington & Western Railway Co. v. McBroom, 98 Ind. 167, 1884 Ind. LEXIS 526 (Ind. 1884).

Opinion

Elliott, C. J.

This action was commenced in the Fountain Circuit Court and carried by change of venue to the Warren Circuit Court. The introductory clause of the assignment of errors reads thus: “The appellant says that there is manifest error in the judgment and proceedings of this cause in the circuit court of Fountain county, Indiana, in this, to wit.” The appellee stoutly contends that this statement restricts the assignment to errors committed by the court named, and that it can not be extended to rulings made by the Warren Circuit Court. Cases closely analogous are cited, and we feel bound to hold that the contention of the appellee must prevail, although, if the question were an open •one, we might be reluctant to adopt a rule so rigorous as that laid down by some of the adjudged cases. Shaw v. Spencer, 33 Ind. 143; Hollingsworth v. State, ex rel., 8 Ind. 257; Riley v. Murray, 8 Ind. 354; State, ex rel., v. Delano, 34 Ind. 52; State, ex rel., v. Terre Haute, etc., R. R. Co., 64 Ind. 297; Buskirk Prac. 110; Powell App. Proc. 277.

The principle upon which these cases proceed is that the assignment of errors is in the nature of a complaint, and that this court is bound to give the same effect to the statements in the assignment of errors as the trial court is bound to give to the statements of a complaint.

[168]*168Filed June 17, 1884. Petition for a rehearing overruled Nov. 12, 1884.

The only ruling made by the Fountain Circuit Court was upon the demurrer to the complaint, and that ruling is conceded to have been correct.

Judgment affirmed.'

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

Related

Holliday & Wyon Co. v. O'Donnell
90 N.E. 24 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1909)
Romona Oölitic Stone Co. v. Shields
88 N.E. 595 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1909)
Indianapolis Traction & Terminal Co. v. Richey
81 N.E. 609 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1907)
Chicago Terminal Transfer Railroad v. Walton
74 N.E. 988 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1905)
Baldwin v. Sutton
47 N.E. 629 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1897)
Smith v. Smith
5 N.E. 411 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1886)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
98 Ind. 167, 1884 Ind. LEXIS 526, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/indiana-bloomington-western-railway-co-v-mcbroom-ind-1884.