Legal Opinion
Smith v. Kinney
Indiana Court of Appeals
Decided December 10, 1975No. 3-574A93PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtStaton, P.J.
— The present case was tried by jury. The only issue presented for review is whether the trial court *203erred in granting defendant Kinney’s motion for a directed verdict at the close of plaintiff’s case. We conclude that there was no error, and the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
On October 29, 1964, Charles Smith allegedly applied to the Board of Directors of the Merrillville Conservancy District for the annexation of certain real estate. On April 27, 1965, the property was annexed. Smith alleged that he was represented in the annexation proceedings by Martin Kinney and that Kinney’s…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Miller v. GrieselIndiana Supreme Court · 1974
- Mamula v. Ford Motor CompanyIndiana Court of Appeals · 1971
- Benner-Coryell Lumber Co. v. Indiana Unemployment Compensation BoardIndiana Supreme Court · 1940
- Farmer v. Werner Transportation CompanyIndiana Court of Appeals · 1972
- Speedway Realty Co. v. Grasshoff Realty Corp.Indiana Supreme Court · 1966
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Petroski v. Northern Indiana Public Service Co.Indiana Court of Appeals · 1976
- Indiana Department of State Revenue v. General Foods Corp.Indiana Court of Appeals · 1981
- State Board of Tax Commissioners v. Carrier Corp.Indiana Supreme Court · 1977
- S. BD. OF TAX COM'RS OF S. OF IND. v. Carrier Corp.Indiana Supreme Court · 1977
- City of Kokomo, Indiana v. Estate of Audra R. NewtonIndiana Court of Appeals · 2019
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.