Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Coleman v. New York, Chicago & St. Louis Railroad

Indiana Court of Appeals

Decided November 19, 1951No. 18,144Published

1Concurrence

CONCURRING OPINION

Wiltrout, J.

I concur in the result reached in this case, but do not concur in that part of the majority-opinion which holds that error in a trial court’s action in directing a verdict may not be presented by an independent assignment of errors.

The following wording was added to Rule 1-7 in 1943:

“The court’s action in directing or refusing to direct a verdict shall be shown by order book entry. Error may be predicated upon such ruling or upon the giving or refusing to give a written instruction directing a verdict.”

The purpose of this change in the Rule seems clear. It was…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Bartley v. Chicago & Eastern Illinois Railway Co.Indiana Supreme Court · 1942
  2. Hansbrough v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1950
  3. Long v. ArcherIndiana Supreme Court · 1943
  4. McKinnon v. ParrillIndiana Court of Appeals · 1942
  5. Coleman v. New York, Chicago & St. Louis RailroadIndiana Court of Appeals · 1951

3 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