Legal Opinion

Chicago, Terre Haute & Southeastern Railway Co. v. Collins

Indiana Court of Appeals

Decided February 6, 1924No. 11,657PublishedCited by 26 opinions

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

  1. Riley v. WalkerIndiana Court of Appeals · 1893
  2. City of Jeffersonville v. GrayIndiana Supreme Court · 1905
  3. New York, Chicago & St. Louis Railroad v. CallahanIndiana Court of Appeals · 1907
  4. Cleveland, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Railroad v. BelangeIndiana Court of Appeals · 1922
  5. Louisville, New Albany & Chicago Railroad v. BarnesIndiana Court of Appeals · 1896

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

3Cited by26 opinions

  1. General Outdoor Advertising Co. v. Lasalle Realty Corp.Indiana Court of Appeals · 1966
  2. L. B. Menefee Lumber Co. v. MacDonaldOregon Supreme Court · 1927
  3. Wyler v. Lilly Varnish Co.Indiana Court of Appeals · 1969
  4. State Ex Rel. Talkington v. Hoffmann, JudgeIndiana Supreme Court · 1947
  5. State Ex Rel. Stockton v. LeopoldIndiana Supreme Court · 1949

21 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