Legal Opinion

Coomler v. Hefner

Indiana Supreme Court

Decided November 15, 1882No. 9599PublishedCited by 16 opinions

From the Huntington Circuit Court.

1Opinion of the CourtWoods, C. J.

Action commenced before a justice of the peace, by the appellee against the appellant, to recover the possession of real "estate. The appellant had occupied as the tenant of the appellee, and the question is whether a notice to quit was necessary in order to terminate the tenancy. It *109is conceded that no notice was given, and for this reason the appellant claims that the verdict against him is contrary to the law and the evidence, and, consequently, that his motion for a new trial should have been granted. Counsel for the appellee insist that a notice to quit was not necessary, because the…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Thiebaud v. First National BankIndiana Supreme Court · 1873
  2. Falley v. GilesIndiana Supreme Court · 1867
  3. Bright v. McOuatIndiana Supreme Court · 1872
  4. Tolle v. OrthIndiana Supreme Court · 1881
  5. Burbank v. DyerIndiana Supreme Court · 1876

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

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. Myers v. MarisIndiana Court of Appeals · 1975
  2. Harry v. HarryIndiana Supreme Court · 1891
  3. Slusher v. StateIndiana Court of Appeals · 1982
  4. Indianapolis, Decatur & Western Railway Co. v. First National BankIndiana Supreme Court · 1893
  5. Bollenbacker v. FrittsIndiana Supreme Court · 1884

11 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