Legal Opinion

Bloomfield Railroad v. Van Slike

Indiana Supreme Court

Decided September 22, 1886No. 12,686PublishedCited by 13 opinions

From the Greene Circuit Court.

1Opinion of the CourtElliott, J.

The appellee’s complaint is in three paragraphs ; the first and second seek to recover for' injuries to real estate by the construction of a railroad, and the third seeks to recover possession of the real estate.

The first and second paragraphs arc undoubtedly good, for they show a wrongful entry upon the plaintiff’s land. Such an entry is a trespass, and every trespass is actionable. If a complaint shows a cause of action, it will repel a demurrer, although it may not entitle the plaintiff to all the relief prayed.

We think the third paragraph is sufficient, but if we were wrong in this, we…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Ryan v. CurranIndiana Supreme Court · 1878
  2. Ohio & Mississippi R. W. Co. v. NicklessIndiana Supreme Court · 1880
  3. Sessengut v. PoseyIndiana Supreme Court · 1879
  4. Erie & Western Railway Co. v. GriffinIndiana Supreme Court · 1883
  5. Fort Wayne, Muncie & Cincinnati Railroad v. MellettIndiana Supreme Court · 1884

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Midland Railway Co. v. FisherIndiana Supreme Court · 1890
  2. Xenia Real Estate Co. v. MacyIndiana Supreme Court · 1897
  3. Armstrong v. DunnIndiana Supreme Court · 1895
  4. Lime City Building, Loan & Savings Ass'n v. BlackIndiana Supreme Court · 1893
  5. Straus v. YeagerIndiana Court of Appeals · 1911

8 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