Legal Opinion

Lee v. McClelland

Indiana Supreme Court

Decided May 28, 1901No. 19,601PublishedCited by 9 opinions

From Hendricks Circuit Court; Thomas J. Gofer, Judge. Action by Elij ah Lee for the custody of his minor son who had been committed to the reform school for boys. From a judgment in favor of defendants, plaintiff appeals.

1Opinion of the CourtMonks, C. J.

Appellant brought this action under §8326 Burns 1894, §6223 E. S. 1881 and Horner 1897, to recover the custody of his son, who had been committed to the reform school for boys by the Huntington Circuit Court. The grounds upon which he claimed such recovery were stated as follows in his complaint: “That his son was committed to said institution without any warrant of law, in this, that there was no proceeding in the Huntington Circuit Court to prosecute his said son for crime upon which any finding of record was made, or as to his age; that his son was not brought before the court or judge,…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Lowery v. HowardIndiana Supreme Court · 1885
  2. Willis v. BaylesIndiana Supreme Court · 1886
  3. McLaughlin v. EtchisonIndiana Supreme Court · 1891
  4. Turner v. ConkeyIndiana Supreme Court · 1892
  5. Bruce v. OsgoodIndiana Supreme Court · 1900

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Stone v. ElliottIndiana Supreme Court · 1914
  2. Gillespie v. RumpIndiana Supreme Court · 1904
  3. Soules v. RobinsonIndiana Supreme Court · 1902
  4. Darrow v. Chicago, Lake Shore & South Bend RailroadIndiana Supreme Court · 1907
  5. McLaughlin v. BarrCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1921

4 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