Service v. Gambrel
This text of 11 N.E. 240 (Service v. Gambrel) 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.
Opinion
The appellant discusses the questions arising on the special finding and no others, and, under the long settled practice, must be deemed to have waived all other questions.
The appellees contend that the special finding is not properly a part of the record. This contention must prevail. There is neither a bill of exceptions nor a special order making the finding a part of the record, nor is the finding signed by the judge who tried the case, and it can not be regarded as anything more than a general finding. Peoria, etc., Ins. Co. v. Walser, 22 Ind. 73; McClellan v. Bond, 92 Ind. 424, and cases cited; Wallace v. Kirtley, 98 Ind. 485.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
11 N.E. 240, 110 Ind. 349, 1887 Ind. LEXIS 64, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/service-v-gambrel-ind-1887.