Mills v. Kutter

Indiana Court of Appeals

Mills v. Kutter

211 N.E.2d 49, 138 Ind. App. 6, 1965 Ind. App. LEXIS 494

CourtIndiana Court of Appeals

DecidedOctober 26, 1965

DocketNo. 20,384

StatusPublished

This text of 211 N.E.2d 49 (Mills v. Kutter) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Indiana Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Mills v. Kutter, 211 N.E.2d 49, 138 Ind. App. 6, 1965 Ind. App. LEXIS 494 (Ind. Ct. App. 1965).

Pincite

Opinion

[7]*7On Motion to Dismiss

Bierly, C. J.

On October 8, 1965, the Honorable Carl M. Gray, of the firm of Gray & Waddle, Petersburg, Indiana, filed in this cause a motion entitled “APPELLANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS CAUSE OF ACTION”, praying therein that this cause of action be dismissed at appellant’s costs.

Appellant also filed on said date a certification by Carl M. Gray that he delivered, by United States Mail, a copy of said motion to dismiss to Shake & Lewis, Attorneys, 305 Busseron Street, Vincennes, Indiana, counsel for appellees.

Appellees have not filed an assignment of cross-errors nor any objections to said motion.

And the court, having examined said motion and proof of notice and being duly advised in the premises, finds that said motion should be sustained.

And the court now dismisses such cause of action with costs taxed against appellant.

Cause of action dismissed.

Note. — Reported in 211 N. E. 2d 49.

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