Legal Opinion

Cauble v. Hultz

Indiana Supreme Court

Decided March 12, 1889No. 13,633PublishedCited by 1 opinion

From the Washington Circuit Court.

1Opinion of the CourtBerkshire, J.

This is an action for injunction. There are two errors assigned :

1st. The court erred in sustaining the demurrer to the amended complaint.

2d. The court erred in sustaining the motion to dissolve the temporary restraining order issued and granted in the cause. .

The amended complaint states substantially the following facts: That the appellee Hultz is the supervisor of Road District 3, in Jefferson township, in Washington county, Indiana, and the appellee Enochs is the trustee of said township; that the appellant is the owner of certain real estate situated in said township, which is described…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Ross v. ThompsonIndiana Supreme Court · 1881
  2. Winslow v. NaysonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1873
  3. Clark v. Jeffersonville RailroadIndiana Supreme Court · 1873
  4. Frizell v. RogersIllinois Supreme Court · 1876
  5. Kyle v. Board of CommissionersIndiana Supreme Court · 1884

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Washington Township v. RattsIndiana Supreme Court · 1913

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

Powered by the Exa API