Legal Opinion
Rush v. Hunziker
Indiana Supreme Court
Decided January 29, 1940No. 27,321PublishedCited by 15 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtRoll, J.
This action was brought by appellee to recover damages for personal injuries resulting from alleged negligence of appellant as hereinafter set out.
The complaint was in one paragraph, and was answered by a general denial. The cause was tried by the court without the intervention of a jury. The court found in favor of appellee and against the appellant.
Appellant filed a motion for a new trial and also a motion to modify and correct the judgment; both of which were overruled by the court.
The motion for a new trial questions the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain the decision of the court,…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Pettyjohn & Sons v. BashamSupreme Court of Virginia · 1919
- Hall v. Barber Door Co.California Supreme Court · 1933
- Charlock v. . FreelNew York Court of Appeals · 1891
- De Lee v. T. J. Pardy Construction Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1928
- Gardner v. SmithMichigan Supreme Court · 1859
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- Blake v. Calumet Construction Corp.Indiana Supreme Court · 1996
- Brickley v. BrickleyIndiana Supreme Court · 1965
- Walters v. DeanIndiana Court of Appeals · 1986
- Samuel E. Pentecost Construction Co. v. O'DonnellIndiana Court of Appeals · 1942
- Guy's Concrete, Inc. v. CrawfordIndiana Court of Appeals · 2003
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.