Morton v. Stevens

Indiana Supreme Court

Morton v. Stevens

5 Ind. 519

DecidedDecember 9, 1854

StatusPublished

This text of 5 Ind. 519 (Morton v. Stevens) 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.

Bluebook

Morton v. Stevens, 5 Ind. 519 (Ind. 1854).

Pincite

Opinion

Stuart, J.

Case. Trial by jury. Verdict and judgment for Stevens, the plaintiff below.

There was a motion in arrest of judgment and for a new trial. The evidence is not in the record. The instructions of the Court to the jury are set out, and that is all the plaintiffs in error complain of.

As to the motion in arrest, see Rogers v. Maxwell, 4 Ind. 262.

Without the evidence we can not say whether the instructions are erroneous or not. There might be a state of facts in which the evidence was correct. Abrams v. Smith, 8 Blackf. 95.—Collis v. Bowen, id. 282.

Per Curiam. — The judgment is affirmed with costs.

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

Stuart, J.

Case. Trial by jury. Verdict and judgment for Stevens, the plaintiff below.

There was a motion in arrest of judgment and for a new trial. The evidence is not in the record. The instructions of the Court to the jury are set out, and that is all the plaintiffs in error complain of.

As to the motion in arrest, see Rogers v. Maxwell, 4 Ind. 262.

Without the evidence we can not say whether the instructions are erroneous or not. There might be a state of facts in which the evidence was correct. Abrams v. Smith, 8 Blackf. 95.—Collis v. Bowen, id. 282.

Per Curiam. — The judgment is affirmed with costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

5 Ind. 519, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/morton-v-stevens-ind-1854.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack