Legal Opinion · Dissent

Baxter v. Lyttle

Indiana Court of Appeals

Decided June 26, 1984No. 4-783A251Published

1DissentSullivan, Judge

Although I agree with the majority decision insofar as it affirms the award of compensatory damages and the denial of attorney fees to plaintiff, I dissent with respect to the imposition of treble damages against Baxter.

The majority erroneously relies upon Wright v. Reuss (1st Dist.1982) Ind.App., 434 N.E.2d 925. Wright involved timber which was not covered by the contract between Wright and the Schwabs but was located on adjoining land owned by Reuss. The timber was mistakenly cut by Wright thinking that it was on Schwabs’ real estate. The timber in controversy in Wright had never been…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Meade Electric Co., Etc. v. Hagberg Etc.Indiana Court of Appeals · 1959
  2. Evansville & Ohio Valley Railway Co. v. Southern Indiana Rural Electric Corp.Indiana Supreme Court · 1953
  3. Wright v. ReussIndiana Court of Appeals · 1982

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API