Legal Opinion
Pursley v. Hisch
Indiana Court of Appeals
Decided April 18, 1949No. 17,843PublishedCited by 34 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtDraper, J.
The judge’s certificate to the bill of exceptions containing the evidence in this case shows the signature was affixed thereto by rubber stamp. For this reason it is asserted the evidence is not in the record, and therefore not before this court:
If the judge attached his signature to the certificate by means 'of a rubber stamp, with the intention of so signing it, it will be regarded as having been signed by him. Hamilton v. The State (1885), 103 Ind. 96, 2 N. E. 299. Our Supreme Court has said the rubber stamp signature of a deputy prosecuting attorney, who is a judicial officer, is the…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- In Re the Estate of FindlayNew York Court of Appeals · 1930
- State v. ColitonNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1945
- Hamilton v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1885
- Phillips v. State Ex Rel. HathcockIndiana Court of Appeals · 1925
- Bailey v. BoydIndiana Supreme Court · 1877
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by34 opinions
- A----. B v. C----. DIndiana Court of Appeals · 1971
- K.S. v. R.S.Indiana Supreme Court · 1996
- R. D. S. v. S. L. S.Indiana Court of Appeals · 1980
- Smith v. RobbinsMichigan Court of Appeals · 1979
- Wilkins v. Department of Human ResourcesSupreme Court of Georgia · 1985
29 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.