Legal Opinion
Baltimore & Ohio & Chicago Railway Co. v. Evarts
Indiana Supreme Court
Decided December 7, 1887No. 12,970PublishedCited by 11 opinions
From the LaPorte Circuit Court.
1Opinion of the CourtElliott, J.
The complaint of the appellee as originally-filed was in two paragraphs, both seeking a recovery for a mare and colt killed by a locomotive of the appellant.
The second paragraph of the complaint was withdrawn by a dismissal, and after this had been done the appellant unsuccessfully offered it in evidence. We think the pleading was admissible.
In Boots v. Canine, 94 Ind. 408, the question was fully discussed and many authorities cited. It was there held that a pleading like that before us should be received in evidence. We do not deem it necessary to again discuss the question, but content…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Nave v. FlackIndiana Supreme Court · 1883
- Union Mutual Life Insurance v. BuchananIndiana Supreme Court · 1885
- Boots v. CanineIndiana Supreme Court · 1884
- Harbor v. MorganIndiana Supreme Court · 1853
- Lanman v. CrookerIndiana Supreme Court · 1884
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Louisville, New Albany & Chicago Railway Co. v. HubbardIndiana Supreme Court · 1888
- Lane v. Choctaw, Oklahoma & Gulf RailroadSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1907
- Indiana State Highway Commission v. VanderburIndiana Court of Appeals · 1982
- Cleveland, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Railway Co. v. GrayIndiana Supreme Court · 1897
- Tobin v. YoungIndiana Supreme Court · 1890
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.