Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Shuman v. Hauk

Indiana Court of Appeals

Decided February 14, 1968No. 20,627Published

1Concurrence

Concurring Opinion

Faulconer, J.

— I agree with the majority opinion that this judgment should be affirmed. I cannot agree, however, in the statement that the second specification in appellants’ motion for new trial presents nothing to the trial court nor to this court. Furthermore I do not think the cases cited therein support the proposition. The specifications held insufficient in Sikes v. Lefton (1960), 130 Ind. App. 620, 622, 166 N. E. 2d 652, stated that the “Verdict and judgment rendered herein are not sustained by sufficient evidence” when the trial was by the court and not a jury. That…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Henschen v. New York Central RailroadIndiana Supreme Court · 1945
  2. Adkins v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1955
  3. Heekin Can Co. v. PorterIndiana Supreme Court · 1943
  4. Sikes v. LeftonIndiana Court of Appeals · 1960
  5. Warren v. State Farm Mutual Auto Ins.Indiana Court of Appeals · 1964

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

Powered by the Exa API