Legal Opinion

Dinsmore v. Kreighbaum

Indiana Court of Appeals

Decided April 22, 1926No. 12,481PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtNichols, C. J.

Action for seduction by appellant against appellee. There was a trial by jury and a verdict against appellant, on which judgment was rendered, from which this appeal. The error assigned is the action of the court in overruling appellant’s motion for a new trial, under which appellant presents that there was error in giving instruction No. 9 tendered by appellee. This instruction calls special attention to appellant as a witness, and to parts of her evidence.in such a way as that she may have been discredited and prejudiced thereby. Appellant has fully briefed the question and makes, in the…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Railroad v. LinderIndiana Supreme Court · 1925
  2. Goldberg v. HauerIndiana Court of Appeals · 1924

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Bryant v. School Town of Oakland CityIndiana Supreme Court · 1930
  2. Kreighbaum v. DinsmoreIndiana Court of Appeals · 1929
  3. Tate v. LeggIndiana Court of Appeals · 1929

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

Powered by the Exa API