Kisler v. Tinder
This text of 29 Ind. 270 (Kisler v. Tinder) 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.
Opinion
Suit for work and labor. The third paragraph of the answer averred that the work and labor was done in part performance of a certain special contract con[271]*271tained in a lease, which was, however, broken by the plaintiff in several specified particulars, to the defendant’s damage, and he claimed to recover such damages as a counterclaim. The error complained of is that the court below overruled a demurrer to this paragraph of the answer. The appellant’s counsel suggests no satisfactory reason for holding the paragraph bad, and none occurs to us. "We think it was a good counter-claim.
The judgment is affirmed, with ten per cent, damages, and costs.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
29 Ind. 270, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kisler-v-tinder-ind-1868.