Legal Opinion

Axtell v. Workman

Indiana Court of Appeals

Decided March 9, 1897No. 2,122PublishedCited by 3 opinions

From the Greene Circuit Court.

1Opinion of the CourtBlack, J.

Counsel for appellants have argued two alleged errors specified in the assignment, — that the complaint does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action, and that the court erred in overruling the motion of the appellants to set aside the summons and the service thereof.

The action was upon a promissory note assigned by indorsement in writing by the payee to the appellee. The complaint consists of two paragraphs, without any apparent reason for more thari one.

A copy of the note with a copy of the assignment was inserted between these paragraphs and was referred to in each as…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Briggs v. SneghanIndiana Supreme Court · 1873
  2. Eastes v. EastesIndiana Supreme Court · 1881
  3. Ross v. GlassIndiana Supreme Court · 1880

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Town of Knox v. GoldingIndiana Court of Appeals · 1910
  2. Chicago & Southeastern Railway Co. v. HarrisIndiana Court of Appeals · 1897
  3. State ex rel. Indiana District of the United Pentecostal Church, Inc. v. Madison County Superior Court, No. 2Indiana Supreme Court · 1968

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API