Legal Opinion

Sandford Tool & Fork Co. v. Mullen

Indiana Court of Appeals

Decided April 28, 1891No. 65PublishedCited by 12 opinions

From the Vigo Superior Court.

1Opinion of the CourtRobinson, J.

This was an action for false imprisonment. The appellant was the defendant in the court below. The complaint alleges that the appellant’s officers and agents caused and procured appellee’s arrest and imprisonment on the charge of larceny, falsely preferred. The appellant answered the complaint, in three paragraphs :

First. General denial.

Second. Alleging compromise and settlement of the cause of action.

Third. Justification of the arrest and imprisonment.

A demurrer was sustained to the third paragraph of the answer, and excepted to. The appellee replied, by general denial, to the second…

2Cases cited22 opinions

  1. Johnson v. CulverIndiana Supreme Court · 1888
  2. American Express Co. v. PattersonIndiana Supreme Court · 1881
  3. Johnson v. WileyIndiana Supreme Court · 1881
  4. Burns v. FoxIndiana Supreme Court · 1887
  5. Wabash Railway Co. v. SavageIndiana Supreme Court · 1886

17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Adams v. MainIndiana Court of Appeals · 1892
  2. Patchell v. JaquaIndiana Court of Appeals · 1893
  3. Louisville, New Albany & Chicago Railway Co. v. SteeleIndiana Court of Appeals · 1898
  4. Brandt v. State ex rel. BoyerIndiana Court of Appeals · 1897
  5. Ohio & Mississippi Railway Co. v. WrapeIndiana Court of Appeals · 1892

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API