Smithville Telephone Co. v. Campbell

Indiana Court of Appeals

Smithville Telephone Co. v. Campbell

211 N.E.2d 328, 138 Ind. App. 47, 1965 Ind. App. LEXIS 497

CourtIndiana Court of Appeals

DecidedNovember 5, 1965

DocketNo. 20,390

StatusPublished

This text of 211 N.E.2d 328 (Smithville Telephone Co. v. Campbell) 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

Smithville Telephone Co. v. Campbell, 211 N.E.2d 328, 138 Ind. App. 47, 1965 Ind. App. LEXIS 497 (Ind. Ct. App. 1965).

Pincite

Opinion

On Motion to Dismiss

Bierly, C. J.

On October 22,1965, the Smithville Telephone Company, Inc., by attorneys William F. Hendren, Bowen, Myers, Northam & Givan, and Frank E. Spencer, filed in this cause a motion entitled “APPELLANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS APPEAL,” praying therein that its appeal in the above entitled cause from an order and decision of the Public Service Commission on March 12, 1965, be dismissed, in the best interests of the appellant public utility, the public which it serves and the Public Service Commission of Indiana;

Appellant also filed on said date a proof of evidence and a copy of appellant’s motion to dismiss to all attorneys of record.

Appellees have not filed an assignment of cross-errors nor any objections to said motion to dismiss;

[48]*48And the court, having examined said motion and the proof of service and being duly advised in the premises, finds that said motion should be sustained;

And the court now dismisses said cause of action, with costs taxed against the appellant.

Cause of action dismissed, costs taxed against appellant.

Note. — Reported in 211 N. E. 2d 328.

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

On Motion to Dismiss

Bierly, C. J.

On October 22,1965, the Smithville Telephone Company, Inc., by attorneys William F. Hendren, Bowen, Myers, Northam & Givan, and Frank E. Spencer, filed in this cause a motion entitled “APPELLANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS APPEAL,” praying therein that its appeal in the above entitled cause from an order and decision of the Public Service Commission on March 12, 1965, be dismissed, in the best interests of the appellant public utility, the public which it serves and the Public Service Commission of Indiana;

Appellant also filed on said date a proof of evidence and a copy of appellant’s motion to dismiss to all attorneys of record.

Appellees have not filed an assignment of cross-errors nor any objections to said motion to dismiss;

[48]*48And the court, having examined said motion and the proof of service and being duly advised in the premises, finds that said motion should be sustained;

And the court now dismisses said cause of action, with costs taxed against the appellant.

Cause of action dismissed, costs taxed against appellant.

Note. — Reported in 211 N. E. 2d 328.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

211 N.E.2d 328, 138 Ind. App. 47, 1965 Ind. App. LEXIS 497, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/smithville-telephone-co-v-campbell-indctapp-1965.