Legal Opinion

Macey v. Titcombe

Indiana Supreme Court

Decided November 15, 1862PublishedCited by 12 opinions

APPEAL from the Marion Circuit Court.

1Opinion of the CourtPerkins, J.

Suit upon a written instrument, reading thus:

“ David Macey and James Turner v. The City of Indianapolis and Daniel Titcombe.

“"We undertake that the plaintiffs, David Macey and James Turner, shall pay to the defendants, The City of Indianapolis and Daniel Titcombe, all damages and costs which may accrue by reason of the injunction in this action. This 30th day of October, 1859. “ David Macey,

“ James Turner,
“ J. W. Patterson, “Vm. "Wilkison. .
“ Approved by me, this 31st day of October, A. D. 1859.
“ John Coburn, Judge Court Com. Pleas, M. C. “ Filed October 31. John C. New, Clerk.”

This…

2Cited by12 opinions

  1. Labbe v. CorbettTexas Supreme Court · 1888
  2. International & Great Northern Railroad v. ShufordCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1904
  3. American Freehold Land Mortgage Co. of London v. PaceCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1900
  4. Caffrey v. DudgeonIndiana Supreme Court · 1872
  5. Dunn v. CrockerIndiana Supreme Court · 1864

7 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