Stevens v. Dunbar
1 Blackf. 56, 1820 Ind. LEXIS 4
Opinion
HELD, that a judgment in favour of the defendant upon a demurrer to the declaration, is no bar to a subsequent suit for the same cause. Lepping v. Kedgewin, 1 Mod. 207
Held,, also, that in an action of debt upon a note, the interest ascertained to be due at th^ime of the judgment, ought to be entered as so much in damages; and that the judgment in such case is that the plaintiff recover against the defendant the sum of-dollars in debt, and He sum of-dollars in damages, making in all thé sum of-dollars, together with his costs and charges.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Stevens v. Dunbar, 1 Blackf. 56, 1820 Ind. LEXIS 4 (Ind. 1820).
1 Blackf. 56 (Stevens v. Dunbar) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Terre Haute & Indianapolis Railroad v. State ex rel. Ketcham
65 N.E. 401 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1902)
Reed v. Higgins
86 Ind. 143 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1882)
The Tubal Cain
9 F. 834 (S.D. New York, 1881)
Griffin v. Wallace
66 Ind. 410 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1879)
Wilson v. Ray
24 Ind. 156 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1865)
Keater v. Hock, Musser & Co.
16 Iowa 23 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1864)
Estep v. Larsh
21 Ind. 190 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1863)
Gerrish v. Pratt
6 Minn. 53 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1861)
Sherry v. Foresman
6 Blackf. 56 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1841)