Linder v. Smith

Decided April 8, 1892

Indiana Supreme Court · decided 1892-04-08

<p>Pleading. — Complaint.—If the plaintiff is entitled to any substantial relief, on the facts stated in his complaint, a demurrer thereto should he overruled.</p>

Relies on Howe v. Dibble

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1892-04-08

How this case has been cited

Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently March 1916

6 state decisions

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Coffey, J.

¶1This was an action in the Madison Circuit Court to recover a personal judgment for material furnished *148and work and labor done and performed in the construction of a cistern.

Filed April 8, 1892.

¶2Coupled with the allegations necessary to the recovery of a personal judgment were allegations seeking to foreclose a mechanic’s lien.

¶3The court overruled a demurrer to the complaint, and this ruling is the only one discussed by counsel in their briefs.

¶4The court did not err in this ruling.

¶5Independent of the right to a mechanic’s lien the complaint was good as an action for a personal judgment. If a plaintiff is entitled to any substantial relief on the facts stated in his complaint, a demurrer thereto should be overruled. Howe v. Dibble, 45 Ind. 120.

¶6Judgment affirmed.