Legal Opinion

Goudy v. Werbe

Indiana Supreme Court

Decided January 30, 1889No. 12,347PublishedCited by 16 opinions

From the Marion Superior Court.

1Opinion of the Court

Olds, J. —

This is an action of replevin brought by appellee Werbe against appellant and appellee Plummer. Plummer filed a disclaimer in the court below and is only a formal party.

The court made a special finding of facts, and stated conclusions of law thereon. Appellant excepted to the conclusions of law, and filed a motion for a new trial, which was overruled, and judgment entered for appellee Werbe. The facts found by the court are as follows:

On November 27th, 1883, Henry Schnull and William A. Krag recovered three several judgments against appellee Werbe and one Ruth Domauget, before…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Hixon v. GeorgeSupreme Court of Kansas · 1877
  2. O'Donnell v. SegarMichigan Supreme Court · 1872
  3. Haas v. ShawIndiana Supreme Court · 1883
  4. Blair v. SmithIndiana Supreme Court · 1888
  5. Pond v. KimballMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1869

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

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. Crawford v. SternbergCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1915
  2. Elliott v. PontiusIndiana Supreme Court · 1893
  3. Jensen v. WiersmaSupreme Court of Iowa · 1919
  4. Purple v. FarringtonIndiana Supreme Court · 1889
  5. Fairfield Shoe Co. v. OldsIndiana Supreme Court · 1911

11 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