Legal Opinion
McFadden v. Fritz
Indiana Supreme Court
Decided February 3, 1887No. 12,431PublishedCited by 19 opinions
From the Shelby Circuit Court.
1Opinion of the CourtElliott, C. J.
The appellees filed an amended complaint after the appellants had filed answers, and it is insisted that this took from the record the answers, because they were not afterwards re-filed. We can not concur in this view. We think that the appellees tried the case upon the theory that the answers were addressed to the complaint as. amended, and by that theory they are bound. Carver v. Carver, 97 Ind. 497.
It would be unjust to permit a plaintiff, by an amendment to his complaint, to deprive a defendant of the bénefit of rulings upon demurrers to his answers, without first insisting that the…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Fischli v. FischliIndiana Supreme Court · 1825
- Carver v. CarverIndiana Supreme Court · 1884
- Louisville, New Albany & Chicago Railway Co. v. ThompsonIndiana Supreme Court · 1886
- Stockwell v. State ex rel. JohnsonIndiana Supreme Court · 1884
- Wolford v. PowersIndiana Supreme Court · 1882
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by19 opinions
- Branson v. StudabakerIndiana Supreme Court · 1892
- People's Savings, Loan & Building Ass'n v. SpearsIndiana Supreme Court · 1888
- State Exchange Bank of Culver v. TeagueIndiana Court of Appeals · 1986
- Capital Lumbering Co. v. LearnedOregon Supreme Court · 1899
- Jackson v. MorganIndiana Supreme Court · 1906
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.