Legal Opinion

Hull v. State ex rel. Dickey

Indiana Supreme Court

Decided January 26, 1884No. 11,058PublishedCited by 27 opinions

From the Jennings Circuit Court.

1Opinion of the Court

Best, C.

— This was a prosecution for bastardy. The cause was tried by a jury. Verdict and judgment for the State. A motion for a new trial was overruled, and this ruling is assigned as error.

This motion embraced many reasons, but we will only consider those mentioned in appellant’s brief.

It is first insisted that the verdict is contrary to the evidence. This position is based upon the assumption that the case made by the State was completely overthrown by the appellant’s testimony, and hence the verdict was contrary to the evidence. The question made thus arises. The relatrix’s child was born…

2Cited by27 opinions

  1. State v. SteevesOregon Supreme Court · 1896
  2. Blough v. ParryIndiana Supreme Court · 1896
  3. Culpepper v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1910
  4. Beaman v. HedrickIndiana Court of Appeals · 1970
  5. Adams v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 1894

22 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