Walters v. Pinxton

Indiana Supreme Court

Walters v. Pinxton

5 Ind. 429

DecidedDecember 4, 1854

StatusPublished

This text of 5 Ind. 429 (Walters v. Pinxton) 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.

Bluebook

Walters v. Pinxton, 5 Ind. 429 (Ind. 1854).

Pincite

Opinion

Stuart, J.

Debt on a replevin bond. Trial by the Court. Finding and judgment for the plaintiffs. There was a motion for a new trial overruled. Certain evidence of the plaintiffs, and also of the defendants, is set out in a bill of exceptions, and it is also disclosed in the same manner that other evidence was offered and excluded. But it nowhere appears that the record contains all the evidence. The case falls within the rule in Montgomery v. Doe d. Pearson, 4 Ind. R. 266.

I. Hartman and J. Bush, for the plaintiffs. N. O. Ross, for the defendants.

Per Curiam. — The judgment is affirmed with costs.

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

Stuart, J.

Debt on a replevin bond. Trial by the Court. Finding and judgment for the plaintiffs. There was a motion for a new trial overruled. Certain evidence of the plaintiffs, and also of the defendants, is set out in a bill of exceptions, and it is also disclosed in the same manner that other evidence was offered and excluded. But it nowhere appears that the record contains all the evidence. The case falls within the rule in Montgomery v. Doe d. Pearson, 4 Ind. R. 266.

I. Hartman and J. Bush, for the plaintiffs. N. O. Ross, for the defendants.

Per Curiam. — The judgment is affirmed with costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

5 Ind. 429, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/walters-v-pinxton-ind-1854.