Watson v. Tindall

50 N.E. 468, 150 Ind. 488, 1898 Ind. LEXIS 207
CourtIndiana Supreme Court
DecidedMay 19, 1898
DocketNo. 18,382
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 50 N.E. 468 (Watson v. Tindall) 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
Watson v. Tindall, 50 N.E. 468, 150 Ind. 488, 1898 Ind. LEXIS 207 (Ind. 1898).

Opinion

Howard, C. J.

This was an action by appellants to recover undivided interests claimed by them in certain real estate held by appellees. The appellees answered by general denial, and also by special paragraph, to the latter of which a demurrer was overruled. There was a special finding of facts, with, conclusions of law that appellants were not entitled to any interest in the land in dispute.

Much of the briefs of counsel is taken up with a discussion of the sufficiency of the special paragraph of answer. We do not find that any of the objections urged to this pleading are well taken; besides, even if the answer were not good, the ruling would still be harmless. The facts found specially entitled the appellees to judgment in accordance with the conclusions of law; and these facts could be proved under the general denial quite as well as under the special paragraph of answer. See Walling v. Burgess, 122 Ind. 299, 7 L. R. A. 481; section 1067, R. S. 1894 (1055, R. S, 1881).

The appellants and the appellee Annie M. Tindall are the heirs at law of one Ella Watson, deceased. The facts found show that, in 1884, for good consideration, the said Ella Watson, then owner of the land [489]*489in controversy, conveyed the same to said appellee, Annie M. Tindall, by warranty deed; and that the consideration agreed upon has been fully paid by said appellee. The evidence is,not in the record, and no good reason is shown why the conclusion reached by the court should not be sustained. Judgment affirmed.

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

Related

Hadley v. Kays
98 N.E.2d 237 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1951)
Continental National Bank v. Discount & Deposit State Bank
157 N.E. 433 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1927)
Hardison v. Mann
50 N.E. 899 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1898)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
50 N.E. 468, 150 Ind. 488, 1898 Ind. LEXIS 207, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/watson-v-tindall-ind-1898.