Severs v. Bull

Court Of Appeals Of Indian Territory

Severs v. Bull

35 S.W. 234, 1 Indian Terr. 8, 1896 Indian Terr. LEXIS 54

CourtCourt Of Appeals Of Indian Territory

DecidedFebruary 15, 1896

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 35 S.W. 234 (Severs v. Bull) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court Of Appeals Of Indian Territory primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Severs v. Bull, 35 S.W. 234, 1 Indian Terr. 8, 1896 Indian Terr. LEXIS 54 (Conn. 1896).

Pincite

Opinion

Lewis, J.

The fact of appellee’s nonresidence is not shown by the record. No error, therefore, is apparent in the action of the trial court in overruling the motion to dismiss. A motion for a new trial was not filed, nor was the action of the trial court upon the motion to dismiss preserved by bill of exceptions, both of which things were necessary to be done to enable this court to review the error complained of. See case of Severs vs. Trust Co. (this day decided) 1 Ind. Ter. 2. The judgment is affirmed.

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

Lewis, J.

The fact of appellee’s nonresidence is not shown by the record. No error, therefore, is apparent in the action of the trial court in overruling the motion to dismiss. A motion for a new trial was not filed, nor was the action of the trial court upon the motion to dismiss preserved by bill of exceptions, both of which things were necessary to be done to enable this court to review the error complained of. See case of Severs vs. Trust Co. (this day decided) 1 Ind. Ter. 2. The judgment is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

35 S.W. 234, 1 Indian Terr. 8, 1896 Indian Terr. LEXIS 54, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/severs-v-bull-ctappindterr-1896.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack