Chicago, Terre Haute & Southeastern Railway Co. v. Collins
Indiana Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the CourtDausman, P. J.
(after making the foregoing statement) :
The first error assigned has been expressly waived. Under the second assignment, the appellant contends that a recovery is absolutely inhibited by the old rule that a litigant will not be permitted to recover on any “theory” other than the one stated in his pleading. To sustain the contention, counsel proceed to ' put their own construction upon the complaint. They say that the plain “theory” of the complaint is that the track was originally constructed by the appellant; and that the original construction of the track was wrongful. They insist that the…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Riley v. WalkerIndiana Court of Appeals · 1893
- City of Jeffersonville v. GrayIndiana Supreme Court · 1905
- New York, Chicago & St. Louis Railroad v. CallahanIndiana Court of Appeals · 1907
- Cleveland, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Railroad v. BelangeIndiana Court of Appeals · 1922
- Louisville, New Albany & Chicago Railroad v. BarnesIndiana Court of Appeals · 1896
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by26 opinions
- General Outdoor Advertising Co. v. Lasalle Realty Corp.Indiana Court of Appeals · 1966
- L. B. Menefee Lumber Co. v. MacDonaldOregon Supreme Court · 1927
- Wyler v. Lilly Varnish Co.Indiana Court of Appeals · 1969
- State Ex Rel. Talkington v. Hoffmann, JudgeIndiana Supreme Court · 1947
- State Ex Rel. Stockton v. LeopoldIndiana Supreme Court · 1949
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.