Legal Opinion

Shewalter v. Bergman

Indiana Supreme Court

Decided February 4, 1890No. 13,951PublishedCited by 21 opinions

From the Jay Circuit Court.

1Opinion of the CourtElliott, J.

The appellee prosecutes this action to recover damages for her own seduction.

The appellant insists that the complaint, on its face,.shows that the action is barred by the statute of limitations, and is therefore bad. If it were conceded that the appellant’s construction of the complaint is correct, still, the conclusion' which he deduces would not follow. Where there are exceptions in the statute of limitations a demurrer will not lie to a complaint unless it appears that the case is not within any of the exceptions. Dunn v. Tousey, 80 Ind. 288, and cases cited; Devor v. Rerick, 87 Ind. 337;…

2Cases cited31 opinions

  1. City of Teree Haute v. HudnutIndiana Supreme Court · 1887
  2. State v. MarkinsIndiana Supreme Court · 1884
  3. Bass Foundry v. Board of CommissionersIndiana Supreme Court · 1888
  4. Over v. SchifflingIndiana Supreme Court · 1885
  5. Mercer v. CorbinIndiana Supreme Court · 1889

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

3Cited by21 opinions

  1. Guy v. SCHULDTIndiana Supreme Court · 1956
  2. Gunder v. TibbitsIndiana Supreme Court · 1899
  3. Board of Commissioners v. HuffmanIndiana Supreme Court · 1892
  4. Swatts v. BowenIndiana Supreme Court · 1895
  5. White v. GregoryIndiana Supreme Court · 1890

16 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