Legal Opinion

Lake Erie & Western Railway Co. v. Mikesell

Indiana Court of Appeals

Decided November 29, 1899No. 2,916PublishedCited by 16 opinions

From the Montgomery Circuit Court.

1Opinion of the Court

Robinson, J. —

A demurrer to each of the three paragraphs of amended complaint was overruled in the Clinton Circuit Court, after which the venue was changed to the Montgomery Circuit Court.

The third paragraph, which alone is questioned in argument, avers that appellee is the father of Eunice Mikesell, an infant daughter now deceased, who, prior to November 3, 1897, was a member of his family and lived with him as such; that appellant’s road runs through the city of Frankfort on a public highway known as Ohio street; “That on the third day of November, 1897,'the said Eunice Mikesell was walking…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Cummins v. City of SeymourIndiana Supreme Court · 1881
  2. Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Railway Co. v. MooreIndiana Supreme Court · 1899
  3. Baltimore & Ohio Southwestern Railway Co. v. ConoyerIndiana Supreme Court · 1897
  4. Jackson School Township v. FarlowIndiana Supreme Court · 1881
  5. Kleyla v. HaskettIndiana Supreme Court · 1887

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

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. Cragg v. Los Angeles Trust Co.California Supreme Court · 1908
  2. Indiana Union Traction Co. v. LoveIndiana Supreme Court · 1912
  3. Chicago, Indianapolis & Louisville Railway Co. v. BarkerIndiana Supreme Court · 1908
  4. Cincinnati, Hamilton & Dayton Railroad v. VoghtIndiana Court of Appeals · 1901
  5. Connell v. HarrisCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1913

11 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