Krill v. Carlson
Indiana Court of Appeals
From Lake Superior Court; Virgil S. Reiter, Judge. Action by Carl A. Carlson and others against Peter W. Krill and others. Judgment by default was taken against defendants, and from a denial of an application for relief, they appeal.
1Opinion of the CourtRemy, J.
Application by appellants, under §135 of the Code of Civil Procedure (§405 Burns 1914, §396 R. S. 1881), for relief from a judgment taken against them by default. A hearing by the court resulted in overruling the application. This action of the trial court is the only error assigned.
It is conceded by appellees that the facts set forth in appellants’ petition and supporting affidavit are sufficient to show a meritorious defense to the original action. The only question for our consideration is whether or not, under the evidence, the judgment was taken through appellants’ excusable neglect. The…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Brumbaugh v. StockmanIndiana Supreme Court · 1882
- Masten v. Indiana Car & Foundry Co.Indiana Court of Appeals · 1900
- Western Union Telegraph Co. v. GriffinIndiana Court of Appeals · 1891
- Cresswell v. WhiteIndiana Court of Appeals · 1892
- American Brewing Co. v. JergensIndiana Court of Appeals · 1899
3Cited by8 opinions
- Moe v. KoeIndiana Court of Appeals · 1975
- Brutus v. WrightIndiana Court of Appeals · 1975
- Carty v. ToroIndiana Supreme Court · 1944
- Himelstein Bros., Inc. v. the Texas Co.Indiana Court of Appeals · 1955
- Staggs v. WrightIndiana Court of Appeals · 1948
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.