LaSalle Extension University v. Kronewitter

86 N.E.2d 707, 119 Ind. App. 341, 1949 Ind. App. LEXIS 181
Indiana Court of Appeals·Decided June 29, 1949·No. No. 17,910.·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

Royse, J.

This is an attempt to appeal from a judgment of the St. Joseph Superior Court No. 1. The assignment of errors here is as follows:

“1. Court’s decision is not sustained by sufficient evidence;
“2. Court’s decision is contrary to law.”

Appellee has filed his motion to affirm the judgment on the grounds that no question has been presented by the above assignment of errors. The motion will have to be sustained. Burns’ 1946 Replacement, § 2-2401; Van Buskirk et al. v. Stover (1904), 162 Ind. *342 448, 70 N. E. 520; Zimmerman v. Gaumer et al. (1899), 152 Ind. 552, 555, 53 N. E. 829.

Judgment affirmed.

Note. — Reported in 86 N. E. 2d 707.

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

LaSalle Extension University v. Kronewitter, 86 N.E.2d 707, 119 Ind. App. 341, 1949 Ind. App. LEXIS 181 (Ind. Ct. App. 1949).

86 N.E.2d 707 (LaSalle Extension University v. Kronewitter) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Deckard v. Indiana State School Building Authority
117 N.E.2d 367 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1954)
Parliament v. Taber
100 N.E.2d 902 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1951)
Harlos v. Currie
100 N.E.2d 901 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1951)
Stutz v. Used Car Loan Co.
88 N.E.2d 50 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1949)