Slessman v. Crozier
Indiana Supreme Court
From the Whitley Circuit Court.
1Opinion of the CourtWoods, J.
— The appellant has assigned error upon the overruling of his motion for a new trial.
The appellee, citing Fisher v. Purdue, 48 Ind. 323, and Carlton v. Cummins, 51 Ind. 478, insists that the case was determined upon an agreed statement of the facts, and consequently that the ruling on the motion for a new trial presents no question.
*488The difference, however, between submitting a case upon an agreed statement, under the 386th section of the code (R. S. 1881, section 553), and the use of an agreed statement of facts as evidence upon the trial of issues, regularly formed, is manifest, and has been…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Fisher v. PurdueIndiana Supreme Court · 1874
- Downey v. WashburnIndiana Supreme Court · 1881
- Carlton v. CumminsIndiana Supreme Court · 1875
3Cited by12 opinions
- Adams v. City of ShelbyvilleIndiana Supreme Court · 1900
- Bolton v. VellinesSupreme Court of Virginia · 1897
- Smith v. CostelloIdaho Supreme Court · 1955
- City of Logansport v. HumphreyIndiana Supreme Court · 1882
- Pennsylvania Co. v. NiblackIndiana Supreme Court · 1884
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.