Legal Opinion

Kinney v. Dodge

Indiana Supreme Court

Decided April 30, 1885No. 11,773PublishedCited by 27 opinions

From the Elkhart Circuit Court.

1Opinion of the CourtHowk, J.

In this case the appellee, Dodge, the defendant below, has assigned here as cross error, that the appellant’s complaint does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. In the natural order of things, this cross error-should be fii^st considered; because, if the appellant had no-cause of action against the appellee, it is certain that the judgment below should be affirmed, without regard to any intervening error. This is settled by the decisions of this court. Fell v. Muller, 78 Ind. 507; Clawson v. Chicago, etc., R. W. Co., 95 Ind. 152.

In his complaint the appellant alleged…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Donellan v. HardyIndiana Supreme Court · 1877
  2. Drinkout v. Eagle Machine WorksIndiana Supreme Court · 1883
  3. Rothrock v. PerkinsonIndiana Supreme Court · 1877
  4. Fell v. MullerIndiana Supreme Court · 1881
  5. Clawson v. Chicago & Great Southern Railway Co.Indiana Supreme Court · 1884

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

3Cited by27 opinions

  1. Scott v. Bodor, Inc.Indiana Court of Appeals · 1991
  2. City of South Bend v. TurnerIndiana Supreme Court · 1901
  3. Conant v. National State BankIndiana Supreme Court · 1889
  4. Laverty v. State ex rel. HillIndiana Supreme Court · 1887
  5. Smith v. SmithIndiana Supreme Court · 1886

22 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