Legal Opinion

Durham v. State ex rel. Anderson

Indiana Supreme Court

Decided January 5, 1889No. 14,313PublishedCited by 12 opinions

From the Montgomery Circuit Court.

1Opinion of the Court

Elliott, J. —

The relator’s complaint, omitting the formal parts, reads thus: “ That the defendant, William H. Durham, is now, and for ten years last past has been, a resident of Union township, Montgomery County, Indiana; that, on the 1st day of April, 1887, said defendant was the owner of a large sum of money, to wit, one hundred and thirty-six thousand two hundred and thirty-one dollars and fourteen cents, on deposit in the First National Bank of Crawfordsville, Indiana, subject to his order, check and draft, and which was subject to taxation under the laws of said State ; that, on the 30th…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Burgh v. State ex rel. McCormickIndiana Supreme Court · 1886
  2. Western Union Telegraph Co. v. ScircleIndiana Supreme Court · 1885
  3. State ex rel. Martindale v. LauerIndiana Supreme Court · 1888

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Hovey v. NobleIndiana Supreme Court · 1889
  2. Ex Parte CainSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1908
  3. Curless v. WatsonIndiana Supreme Court · 1913
  4. Ex Parte CainCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1908
  5. Johnston v. State ex rel. SeftonIndiana Supreme Court · 1891

7 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