Legal Opinion

Benefiel v. Aughe

Indiana Supreme Court

Decided February 20, 1884No. 10,270PublishedCited by 10 opinions

From the Clinton Circuit Court.

1Opinion of the Court

Bicknell, C. C.

— This was a suit by the appellees for *402partition. Two of the defendants disclaimed. The other two, Benefiel and John C. Fisher, answered separately by general denial. The issues were tried by the court who found for the plaintiffs and rendered an interlocutory judgment that partition be made.

The defendants then made their first motion for a new trial, alleging, as reasons therefor, that “ the finding and decision of the court were not sustained by sufficient evidence, and were contrary to law.” This motion the court overruled and the defendants excepted, but they filed no bill…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Steeple v. DowningIndiana Supreme Court · 1878
  2. Smith v. KylerIndiana Supreme Court · 1881
  3. Ward v. MontgomeryIndiana Supreme Court · 1877
  4. Weston v. JohnsonIndiana Supreme Court · 1874
  5. Vail v. McKernanIndiana Supreme Court · 1863

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

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Hormann v. HartmetzIndiana Supreme Court · 1891
  2. First National Bank v. Farmers & Merchants National BankIndiana Supreme Court · 1908
  3. Shannon v. HayIndiana Supreme Court · 1886
  4. Swift v. HarleyIndiana Court of Appeals · 1898
  5. Russ v. RussIndiana Supreme Court · 1895

5 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