Legal Opinion

Yelton v. Slinkard

Indiana Supreme Court

Decided November 15, 1882No. 9698PublishedCited by 20 opinions

From the Knox Circuit Court.

1Opinion of the Court

Bicknell, C. C.

Samuel W. Slinkard and Henry Slinkard were defendants in an action of replevin brought by Wiley Tindolph.

The sheriff took the goods under the writ of replevin and delivered them to Tindolph, who gave the usual statutory undertaking .signed by the appellant's. Tindolph failed to-recover, and the Slinkards had judgment against him for a return of the property and for costs. Under the civil code of 1852, sections 339 and 374, the jury are required to assess the value of the property and damages for the taking or detention of it, whenever, by their verdict, there is- a judgment for…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Whitney v. LehmerIndiana Supreme Court · 1866
  2. Noble v. EpperlyIndiana Supreme Court · 1855
  3. Brown v. ParkerIndiana Supreme Court · 1840
  4. Mitchell v. BurchIndiana Supreme Court · 1871
  5. Chissom v. LamcoolIndiana Supreme Court · 1857

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

3Cited by20 opinions

  1. Lou Leventhal Auto Co., Inc. v. MunnsIndiana Court of Appeals · 1975
  2. Leeper, Graves & Co. v. First Nat. Bank of HobartSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1910
  3. Fair v. Citizens' State BankSupreme Court of Kansas · 1904
  4. Kunz v. NelsonUtah Supreme Court · 1938
  5. Jackson v. MorganIndiana Supreme Court · 1906

15 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