Keilman, Tr. v. City of Hammond
Indiana Court of Appeals
1Opinion
On Petition Foe Reheaeing.
Royse, J.
Appellee has filed a petition for a rehearing in this case. It is voluminous and filled with specious argument that is in no way germane to the question decided in our original opinion.
It first contends that the cases of Read et al. v. Beczkiewicz, Treasurer, et al. (1939), 215 Ind. 365, 18 N. E. 2d 789, 19 N. E. 2d 465; City of Hammond v. Melville, et al. (1943), 114 Ind. App. 602, 52 N. E. 2d 845; City of Hammond v. Welsh (1946), 224 Ind. 349, 67 N. E. 2d 390, cited in our original opinion does not sustain our holding that the statute of limitations did…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Budd v. Bd. of Co. Comrs. of St. Joseph Co.Indiana Supreme Court · 1939
- Jones v. . KellyNew York Court of Appeals · 1902
- GILKISON v. DarlingtonIndiana Court of Appeals · 1952
- Gorham v. GorhamIndiana Supreme Court · 1913
- Read v. Beczkiewicz, TreasurerIndiana Supreme Court · 1939
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.