Gover v. Dill
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from the Jefferson District Court. Seduction. — On. the trial, the defendant asked various instructions, which were refused, as is shown by the bill of exceptions, because of their inapplicability, and because the same had been given in the instructions in chief. The material facts sufficiently appear in the opinion of tbe court. Tbe defendant appeals.
1Opinion of the Court
Weight, C. «L
Three errors are urged, and relied upon in tbis case:
First. That tbe court erred in tbe .instructions in chief, given to tbe jury.
Second. Tbe refusing tbe instructions asked by defendant.
Third. In overruling defendant’s motion in arrest, and for a new trial.
Various objections are urged to tbe instructions in chief, but however well founded, we cannot consider them, for tbe reason that no objection appears to have been made by defendant, at tbe time they were given to tbe jury. Before a party can avail himself in tbis court, of an error in tbe instructions of tbe court below, be…
2Cited by7 opinions
- Stevenson v. BelknapSupreme Court of Iowa · 1858
- Delvee v. BoardmanSupreme Court of Iowa · 1866
- Riggs v. StateMississippi Supreme Court · 1872
- Dowling v. CrapoIndiana Supreme Court · 1879
- Hawn v. BanghartSupreme Court of Iowa · 1888
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.