Legal Opinion · Dissent

Henderson v. Hicks

Indiana Court of Appeals

Decided October 11, 1984No. 2-683A192Published

1DissentHoffman, Judge

(Sitting by Designation), dissenting.

I must respectfully dissent. The trial court did not commit any harmful error in reading to the jury defendant's tendered Instruction No. 10 pertaining to incurred risk. For this reason I would affirm the judgment of the trial court.

If it appears from the record that the law was stated with substantial accuracy, and the jury was not misled, there is no ground for reversal merely because one particular instruction or a portion thereof was technically erroneous. Shields v. State, (1897) 149 Ind. 395, 49 N.E. 351; Finster v. Wray et al., (1960) 131 Ind.App.…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Shields v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1897
  2. Burks v. WaltersIndiana Court of Appeals · 1957
  3. Finster v. WRAYIndiana Court of Appeals · 1960

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API