Jones v. Bradford

60 N.E. 1125, 27 Ind. App. 698, 1901 Ind. App. LEXIS 130
Indiana Court of Appeals·Decided May 28, 1901·No. No. 3,768·Published

Opinion

Black, C. J.

— Under an assignment that the court erred in overruling their motion for a new trial, appellants have discussed the evidence; but there can be no decision upon the merits, for the reason that the evidence is not presented by a bill of exceptions, an ineffectual attempt being made to bring it into the record by the method provided in the sixth section of the act of 1899. Acts 1899, p. 384. See Adams v. State, 156 Ind. 596; Anderson v. Lake Shore, etc., R. Co., 26 Ind. App. 196; Shirk v. Lingeman, 26 Ind. App. 630; Horner v. Clark, ante, 6.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Jones v. Bradford, 60 N.E. 1125, 27 Ind. App. 698, 1901 Ind. App. LEXIS 130 (Ind. Ct. App. 1901).

60 N.E. 1125 (Jones v. Bradford) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Adams v. State
59 N.E. 24 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1901)
Anderson v. Lake Shore & Michigan Southern Railway Co.
59 N.E. 396 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1901)
Shirk v. Lingeman
59 N.E. 941 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1901)