Poyser v. Walker

Indiana Court of Appeals

Poyser v. Walker

94 N.E.2d 272, 120 Ind. App. 718, 1950 Ind. App. LEXIS 198

CourtIndiana Court of Appeals

DecidedSeptember 27, 1950

DocketNo. 18,023

StatusPublished

This text of 94 N.E.2d 272 (Poyser v. Walker) 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

Poyser v. Walker, 94 N.E.2d 272, 120 Ind. App. 718, 1950 Ind. App. LEXIS 198 (Ind. Ct. App. 1950).

Pincite

Opinion

Draper, J.

— The appellee recovered a money judgment against the appellants, who prosecute this appeal. The appellants have filed in this court a brief which, in our opinion, makes an apparent or prima facie showing of reversible error. The appellee has filed nothing except a request for oral argument, which request was filed several months after the expiration of the time allowed for the filing thereof under Rule 2-21.

For the reasons stated in Meadows v. Hickman (1947), 225 Ind. 146, 73 N. E. 2d 343, and Huffman v. Huffman (1947), 117 Ind. App. 601, 75 N. E. 2d 172, and on the authority of those cases, the judgment is reversed and the cause remanded with instructions to sustain appellants’ motion for new trial.

Note. — Reported in 94 N. E. 2d 272.

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

Draper, J.

— The appellee recovered a money judgment against the appellants, who prosecute this appeal. The appellants have filed in this court a brief which, in our opinion, makes an apparent or prima facie showing of reversible error. The appellee has filed nothing except a request for oral argument, which request was filed several months after the expiration of the time allowed for the filing thereof under Rule 2-21.

For the reasons stated in Meadows v. Hickman (1947), 225 Ind. 146, 73 N. E. 2d 343, and Huffman v. Huffman (1947), 117 Ind. App. 601, 75 N. E. 2d 172, and on the authority of those cases, the judgment is reversed and the cause remanded with instructions to sustain appellants’ motion for new trial.

Note. — Reported in 94 N. E. 2d 272.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

94 N.E.2d 272, 120 Ind. App. 718, 1950 Ind. App. LEXIS 198, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/poyser-v-walker-indctapp-1950.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack