Doe on the demise of Condict v. Herr
Indiana Supreme Court
ON PETITION for a Rehearing.
1Opinion of the CourtStuart, J.
The ground assumed by counsel in favor of a rehearing is thus expressed: “The Court erred in holding that, in a case tried by the Circuit Court without a jury, it is necessary to move for a new trial, in order to present the case on its merits in this Court, on appeal.” And Richardson v. The St. Joseph Iron Company, 5 Blackf. 146, and Rogers v. Bishop, id. 108, are referred to.
These cases do not sustain the position assumed. In Priest v. Martin, 4 Blackf. 311, it is held that the finding óf a Court, without a jury, takes the place of a verdict. The -wotcL judgment, both in 4 Blackf. 311, and…
Also in this document: Per curiam.
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Richardson v. St. Joseph Iron Co.Indiana Supreme Court · 1839
- Reno v. CraneIndiana Supreme Court · 1829
- Priest v. MartinIndiana Supreme Court · 1837
- Rogers v. BishopIndiana Supreme Court · 1839
3Cited by2 opinions
- Pierce v. ManningSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1892
- State v. MooreIndiana Court of Appeals · 1901