Pepin v. Lautman
Indiana Court of Appeals
From Porter Circuit Court; John H. Gillett, Judge. In an action by Jonas M. Lautman against Jule C. Pepin and others on a promissory note plaintiff recovered judgment, and defendants filed a complaint for a new trial on the ground that the judgment was obtained because of the perjured testimony of plaintiff. From an order sustaining a demurrer to the complaint, defendants appeal.
1Opinion of the CourtRobinson, P. J.
Appellants, by a complaint, asked a new trial of an action wherein appellee obtained against appellants a judgment upon a note and a decree of foreclosure. A demurrer to the complaint was sustained and this ruling is the only question presented.
The substance of the charge in the complaint is that the judgment and decree were obtained solely through .and on account of the perjured testimony of appellee, the plaintiff in that action. The complaint is in effect an application to a court of equity to grant a new trial after a judgment and decree in another action between the same parties. The…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Hilton v. GuyotSupreme Court of the United States · 1895
- United States v. ThrockmortonSupreme Court of the United States · 1878
- Pico v. CohnCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
- Steel v. Smelting Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1882
- Vance v. BurbankSupreme Court of the United States · 1880
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Hitt v. CarrIndiana Court of Appeals · 1921
- Partlow v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1924
- Ferrara v. GendusoIndiana Supreme Court · 1938
- Chermak v. ChermakIndiana Supreme Court · 1949
- Cory v. HowardIndiana Court of Appeals · 1929
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.