Townsend v. Doe ex dem. Chapin
8 Blackf. 328, 1847 Ind. LEXIS 11
Opinion
AFTER the testimony in this case was closed, the defendants moved that every instruction, or modification, or explanation thereof to the jury, should be in writing, and objected [329]*329to any instruction, or modification, or explanation thereof being given, unless the same should be written. Held, that the Court, by afterwards giving, at the plaintiff’s request, instructions to the jury with verbal explanations and illustrations, committed an error. Stat. 1839, ,p. 37.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Townsend v. Doe ex dem. Chapin, 8 Blackf. 328, 1847 Ind. LEXIS 11 (Ind. 1847).
8 Blackf. 328 (Townsend v. Doe ex dem. Chapin) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Cutler v. Davidson
146 N.E. 584 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1925)
Boggs v. United States
1901 OK 27 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1901)
Stephenson v. State
11 N.E. 360 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1887)
Bradway v. Waddell
95 Ind. 170 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1884)
City of Atchison v. Jansen
21 Kan. 560 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1879)
Ohio & Mississippi Railway Co. v. Rowland
51 Ind. 285 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1875)
State v. Potter
15 Kan. 302 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1875)
Lung v. Deal
16 Ind. 349 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1861)
McClay v. State
1 Ind. 385 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1849)