Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

25 Ind. 236

Freeman v. Bowman

Indiana Supreme Court

Decided November 15, 1865

Indiana Supreme Court · decided 1865-11-15

<p>New Trias. — Practice.—A complaint for a new trial on the ground of newly discovered evidence must set out the evidence given on the former trial.</p> <p>Practice. — Where a correct result has Been reached in the court helow, the Supreme Court will not reverse the judgment.</p>

Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently November 1881

5 state decisions

Relies on Glidewell v. Daggy

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1865-11-15

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Frazer, C. J.

¶1This was a complaint for a new trial tinder sec. 366 of the code, on the ground of newly *237discovered evidence., A demurrer was sustained to tbe complaint, and that ruling is assigned for error.

J. W. Evans, for appellant.O. 3. Hamilton, for appellee.

¶2The complaint did not purport to show what was the evidence given upon the trial of the case. "Without this it was not possible to determine whether the new evidence would have been likely to change the result, and hence the complaint was entirely insufficient. Glidewell v. Daggy, 21 Ind. 95; Cox v. Hutchings, id., 219.

¶3It is argued that the statute does not contemplate a demurrer and other pleadings as in an. ordinary case. We perceive no reason for overruling the cases cited above, nor any necessity for the consideration of that question here, for as a correct result was reached, we could not, in any event, disturb the judgment.

¶4The judgment is affirmed, with costs.

/25/ind/236 · .json · Public domain