Gerard v. Dill
Indiana Supreme Court
From the Montgomery Circuit Court.
1Opinion of the CourtElliott, J.
The complaint of the appellants counts on an undertaking filed by the appellees in an action of replevin instituted by them.
The second paragraph of the answer reads thus: “The defendants, for further cause of defence, say that before the bringing of this suit they fully settled, compromised and dismissed, by and with the consent and co-operation of plaintiff' Matthew J. Gerard, the action of replevin, in which the bond sued on was given, and said Matthew J. Gerard, for himself,, and as the agent of his co-plaintiff herein at the same time,, and in consideration of said dismissal, agreed that…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Stevison v. EarnestIllinois Supreme Court · 1875
- Hall v. SmithSupreme Court of Iowa · 1859
- Hollinsbee v. RitcheyIndiana Supreme Court · 1874
- O'Neal v. WadeIndiana Supreme Court · 1852
3Cited by1 opinion
- Pipher v. JohnsonIndiana Supreme Court · 1886