Urban v. Kraigg
This text of 21 Ind. 174 (Urban v. Kraigg) 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
This was an action by the appellee, who was the plaintiff, against Urban, to recover damages for pulling down and removing a fence. The issues were submitted to a jury, who found for the plaintiff. New trial refused and judgment. The causes for a new trial are thus assigned:
1. The verdict is unsustained by the evidence.
2. Misconduct of the jury, in this, to-wit: that one of the jurors, during the whole time of the argument, was engaged in reading a newspaper.
As the evidence is not in the record, the first alleged cause [175]*175is not available. And the second is also unavailing, for the reason that it does not appear to have been supported by an affidavit showing its truth. 2 R. S. (G. & H.) pp. 212, 215, §§ 852, 855.
The judgment is affirmed, with 5 per cent. damages and costs.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
21 Ind. 174, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/urban-v-kraigg-ind-1863.