Cleveland, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Railway Co. v. Beard
Indiana Court of Appeals
Prom Hendricks Circuit Court; James L. Clark, Judge. Action by Lou S. Beard against tbe Cleveland, Cincinnati, Chicago and St. Louis Railway Company. From a judgment for plaintiff, the defendant appeals.
1Opinion of the CourtAdams, J.
This appeal is taken from a judgment in favor of appellee and against appellant, for the alleged wrongful appropriation of a highway, which provided the only means of going to and from appellee’s property. The errors relied on for reversal are (1) that the complaint does *106not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action, and (2) that the trial court erred in overruling appellant’s motion for a new trial.
1. It will be noted that the sufficiency of the complaint is challenged only by the assignment of errors. The objection urged is that the theory of the complaint, whether that of…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- City of South Bend v. TurnerIndiana Supreme Court · 1901
- Xenia Real Estate Co. v. MacyIndiana Supreme Court · 1897
- Chicago, Indiana & Eastern Railway Co. v. Wysor Land Co.Indiana Supreme Court · 1904
- Albaugh Bros., Dover & Co. v. LynasIndiana Court of Appeals · 1911
- Webster v. BlighIndiana Court of Appeals · 1912
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Graham v. Henderson Elevator Co.Indiana Court of Appeals · 1916
- Valentine Co. v. SloanIndiana Court of Appeals · 1913
- Harrold v. WhistlerIndiana Court of Appeals · 1916
- Brayton v. City of RushvilleIndiana Court of Appeals · 1918
- Clemens v. StonerIndiana Court of Appeals · 1920
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.