Legal Opinion

Hoeppner v. Saltzgaber

Indiana Court of Appeals

Decided March 11, 1936No. 14,831PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Curtis, C. J. —

This was an action for damages for personal injuries brought by the appellee, Catherine Saltzgaber, against the appellants Dorothy Hoeppner and Clarence W. Hoeppner and also against Harold Lallow and Robert E. Lallow. The complaint was in one paragraph and was answered by a general denial. As a part of instruction number one the court correctly informed the jury that “The complaint has been dismissed as to the defendant, Robert E. Lallow, and all consideration as to him is withdrawn from you.” The record discloses the said dismissal was by the appellee Saltzgaber at the close…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Illinois Central Railroad v. CheekIndiana Supreme Court · 1899
  2. Coconower v. StoddardIndiana Court of Appeals · 1932
  3. Lauter v. DuckworthIndiana Court of Appeals · 1897
  4. Mendenhall v. StewartIndiana Court of Appeals · 1897
  5. San Jacinto Rice Co. v. UlrichCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1919

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

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Pierce v. ClemensIndiana Court of Appeals · 1943
  2. Williams v. CarrCalifornia Supreme Court · 1968
  3. Kettner v. JayIndiana Court of Appeals · 1940
  4. Van Drake v. ThomasIndiana Court of Appeals · 1942
  5. DROLET, ADMTRX. ETC. v. Pennsylvania R. Co.Indiana Court of Appeals · 1960

8 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