Rindge v. Rindge

Indiana Supreme Court

Rindge v. Rindge

22 Ind. 35

DecidedMay 15, 1864

StatusPublished

This text of 22 Ind. 35 (Rindge v. Rindge) 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

Rindge v. Rindge, 22 Ind. 35 (Ind. 1864).

Pincite

Opinion

Hanna, J.

In this case the same facts, shown upon the application for a new trial in the preceding case, are set forth in the form of a complaint to obtain relief from the judgment of the Common Pleas. A demurrer was sustained to the complaint. If the cases of Wooley v. Wooley, and McQuig v. McQuig, in this Court, enunciate correct expositions of the law, this ruling should be sustained. This accords with the doctrines of the preceding case.

Per Curiam.

The judgment is affirmed, with costs.

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

Hanna, J.

In this case the same facts, shown upon the application for a new trial in the preceding case, are set forth in the form of a complaint to obtain relief from the judgment of the Common Pleas. A demurrer was sustained to the complaint. If the cases of Wooley v. Wooley, and McQuig v. McQuig, in this Court, enunciate correct expositions of the law, this ruling should be sustained. This accords with the doctrines of the preceding case.

Per Curiam.

The judgment is affirmed, with costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

22 Ind. 35, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rindge-v-rindge-ind-1864.