Legal Opinion

Lingerman v. Nave

Indiana Supreme Court

Decided May 15, 1869PublishedCited by 6 opinions

APPEAL from the Hendricks Common Pleas.

1Opinion of the CourtElliott, C. J.

Suit by Have against the appellants, on a promissory note. Issues were formed, the trial of which resulted in a finding and judgment for the plaintiff below; a motion for a new trial being overruled.

The judgment must be affirmed. The only errors complained of relate to matter’s occurring on the trial, and for which a new trial was prayed; but the action of the court in overruling the motion for a new trial is not assigned for error. Ho question, therefore, is properly raised by the assignment of errors.

The judgment is affirmed, with costs and ten per cent, damages.

2Cited by6 opinions

  1. Pierce v. ManningSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1892
  2. Miles v. BuchananIndiana Supreme Court · 1871
  3. Carson v. FunkSupreme Court of Kansas · 1882
  4. Green v. State Highway CommissionSupreme Court of Kansas · 1959
  5. Ferrenburg v. Studabaker Turnpike Co.Indiana Supreme Court · 1871

1 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