Legal Opinion

Mullett v. Emme

Indiana Court of Appeals

Decided May 9, 1966No. 20,340PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWlCKENS, J.

In a suit on account, appellant filed what he terms a cross-complaint. The account was for the sale of potatoes and defendant-appellant set up breach of warranty of fitness and suitability for use as seed, in his cross-action.

The only question here is whether the trial court sufficiently complied with the statutory requirements by stating its special findings of fact on the particular issues formed on the cross-complaint.

The cross-complaint made many material and specific allegations which were denied by the answer thereto. A trial of several days was had. Considerable evidence, relating to…

Also in this document: Per curiam.

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Miller, Etc. v. Ortman, Etc.Indiana Supreme Court · 1956
  2. Kerfoot v. KessenerIndiana Supreme Court · 1949
  3. Hutter v. WeissIndiana Court of Appeals · 1961
  4. Quick v. BrennerIndiana Supreme Court · 1885
  5. Kelley, Glover & Vale, Inc. v. HeitmanIndiana Supreme Court · 1942

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Royal Business Machines, Inc. v. Lorraine Corp.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1980
  2. Royal Business MacHines Inc. v. Lorraine Corp. And Michael L. Booher, Lorraine Corp. And Michael L. Booher v. Litton Business Systems, Inc. And Royal Business MacHines Inc., DefendantsCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1980

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API