Legal Opinion

Trentman v. Eldridge

Indiana Supreme Court

Decided December 11, 1884No. 11,350PublishedCited by 32 opinions

From the DeKalb Circuit Court.

1Opinion of the CourtElliott, J.

Counsel for appellees are right in asserting that a finding, though in form a special one, is nothing more than a general finding unless the record shows that it was made at the request of some one of the parties to the action. Cruzan v. Smith, 41 Ind. 288; Kyser v. Wells, 60 Ind. 261; Barkley v. Tapp, 87 Ind. 25. But we think they make a wrong application of the rule. Where the judge who makes and signs the finding states in it that, a jury being waived, the defendants and the plaintiff “ thereupon each request the court to find the facts specially and to state his conclusions of law…

2Cases cited44 opinions

  1. Fischli v. FischliIndiana Supreme Court · 1825
  2. Cruzan v. SmithIndiana Supreme Court · 1872
  3. Anderson v. HubbleIndiana Supreme Court · 1884
  4. Buchanan v. Berkshire Life InsuranceIndiana Supreme Court · 1883
  5. Payne v. . BurnhamNew York Court of Appeals · 1875

39 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by32 opinions

  1. Cupp v. CampbellIndiana Supreme Court · 1885
  2. Post v. LoseyIndiana Supreme Court · 1887
  3. City of Warsaw v. DunlapIndiana Supreme Court · 1887
  4. Citizens Bank v. BolenIndiana Supreme Court · 1889
  5. City of Evansville v. MartinIndiana Supreme Court · 1885

27 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