Legal Opinion

Shields v. Arnold

Indiana Supreme Court

Decided November 23, 1820PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

HELD, that one party has a right to demur to the evidence of the other, although it be parol; and-that Ms adversary is bound to join in demurrer (1).

The leading case on this subject is Gibson v. Hunter, 2 H. Bl. 187. It is there settled, that either party may demur to the evidence of the other, whether it be written or parol. If the evidence be -written, the party must join in demurrer; so if it be certain and positive, though parol. But if the parol evidence be either loose and indeterminate, or circumstantial merely, every fact a,nd conclusion which the evidence conduced to prove, must be…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Pawling and Others v. The United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1808
  2. Bank of United States v. SmithSupreme Court of the United States · 1826
  3. Fowle v. Common Council of AlexandriaSupreme Court of the United States · 1826
  4. Columbian Insurance v. CatlettSupreme Court of the United States · 1827

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Lindley v. KelleyIndiana Supreme Court · 1873
  2. Andrews v. HammondIndiana Supreme Court · 1847

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API