Melvin v. Hamilton, Admr.

199 N.E. 602, 101 Ind. App. 456, 1936 Ind. App. LEXIS 26
Indiana Court of Appeals·Decided February 6, 1936·No. No. 15,194.·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

Wood, J.

This is an attempted appeal from a judgment of the Franklin Circuit Court. The sole error assigned for reversal is the overruling of appellant’s motion for a new trial. The appellants have failed to set out a copy of their motion for a new trial or the substance thereof in their brief. The brief also fails to show that any time was given in which to file a bill of exceptions containing the evidence and proceedings of the trial court or that any bill of exceptions approved by such court was ever filed and made a part of the record. Thus no question is presented for our consideration. State ex rel. v. Hinds (1929), 200 Ind. 613, 165 N. E. 754; United Paperboard Co. v. Muncie, etc., Co. (1926), 84 Ind. App. 333, 151 N. E. 365; Indiana Service Corporation v. Daily (1928), 87 Ind. App. 6, 159 N. E. 767; Rule 21, Supreme and Appellate Courts.

The death of appellee having been suggested the judgment is affirmed as of date of submission.

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

Melvin v. Hamilton, Admr., 199 N.E. 602, 101 Ind. App. 456, 1936 Ind. App. LEXIS 26 (Ind. Ct. App. 1936).

199 N.E. 602 (Melvin v. Hamilton, Admr.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Plumley v. Stanelle
311 N.E.2d 626 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1974)
Ross v. Clore
74 N.E.2d 747 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1947)
American Guaranty Co. v. Sunset Realty & Planting Co.
23 So. 2d 409 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1944)
Stirn v. Vohland
1 N.E.2d 654 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1936)