Nordyke v. McCreery

Indiana Court of Appeals

Nordyke v. McCreery

52 N.E. 89, 21 Ind. App. 708, 1898 Ind. App. LEXIS 679

CourtIndiana Court of Appeals

DecidedNovember 30, 1898

DocketNo. 2,519

StatusPublished

This text of 52 N.E. 89 (Nordyke v. McCreery) 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

Nordyke v. McCreery, 52 N.E. 89, 21 Ind. App. 708, 1898 Ind. App. LEXIS 679 (Ind. Ct. App. 1898).

Pincite

Opinion

Henley, C. J.

This cause originated before a justice of the peace. On appeal to the circuit court the judgment of the justice was sustained. It is assigned as error to this court: (1) That the lower court erred in overruling the motion of appellant to dismiss the appeal; (2) that the lower court erred in overruling the motion of appellant to strike out and disregard the' evidence relating to the title to real estate; (3) that the lower court erred in overruling appellant’s motion for a new trial. There was no attempt in this cause to bring the evidence into the record, and no question depending upon the evidence can be considered. The bill of exceptions by which it is attempted to bring the various motions and the rulings of the lower court thereon into the record was never filed in the clerk’s office after it was signed by the trial judge. The record presents no question to the court for decision-. Judgment affirmed.

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

Henley, C. J.

This cause originated before a justice of the peace. On appeal to the circuit court the judgment of the justice was sustained. It is assigned as error to this court: (1) That the lower court erred in overruling the motion of appellant to dismiss the appeal; (2) that the lower court erred in overruling the motion of appellant to strike out and disregard the' evidence relating to the title to real estate; (3) that the lower court erred in overruling appellant’s motion for a new trial. There was no attempt in this cause to bring the evidence into the record, and no question depending upon the evidence can be considered. The bill of exceptions by which it is attempted to bring the various motions and the rulings of the lower court thereon into the record was never filed in the clerk’s office after it was signed by the trial judge. The record presents no question to the court for decision-. Judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

52 N.E. 89, 21 Ind. App. 708, 1898 Ind. App. LEXIS 679, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/nordyke-v-mccreery-indctapp-1898.