Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

28 Ind. 342

Burton v. Burton

Indiana Supreme Court

Decided November 15, 1867

Indiana Supreme Court · decided 1867-11-15

<p>Appeal — Effect of. — The only effect of an appeal to the Supreme Court is to stay execution on the judgment. In all other respects, the judgment, until annulled or reversed, is binding upon the parties as to any question directly decided.</p>

Relies on Nill v. Comparet

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1867-11-15

How this case has been cited

Cited by 21 later decisions — most recently November 1954

1 federal appellate · 1 district · 19 state decisions

601867187018801890190019101920193019401950decided

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 →

Gresory, J.

¶1— This was an action for partition, brought by the appellants. The complaint charges that the plaintiffs are the only heirs at law of John Burton, deceased; that he died intestate, in September, 1865, seized of the lands of which partition is sought; that the defendant is his widow, *343being a second wife, and the plaintiffs are grand-children by a former marriage.

J. P. Baird,, C. Cruft and W. Mack, for appellants.H. D. Scott and G. C. Duy, for appellee.

¶2The appellee filed an answer, denying that John Burton died intestate, and charging that he left a will, setting out a copy thereof; that the defendant offered this will in the Vigo Court of Common Pleas for probate; that the plaintiffs resisted the probate thereof, and on the trial of such issue the court refused to admit the will to probate; that from this decision the defendant appealed to the Circuit Court; that the latter court dismissed the appeal; that from the dismissal she appealed to this court, and that the appeal is now pending; that this court had granted a supersedeas, and that she had filed her bond. The plaintiffs demurred to this answer. The court below overruled the demurrer and, the plaintiffs declining to reply, rendered a final judgment, dismissing the suit, with costs. The appellants excepted to this judgment. The overruling of the demurrer to the answer and the dismissal of the suit are the errors assigned.

¶3This proceeding in the Common Pleas Court, set out in the answer, is one of the statutory modes of contesting the validity of the will, and concluded the parties thereto. 2 G. & H., §§ 39, 40, 41, 42, pp. 559, 560. The only effect of the appeal to this court is to stay execution upon the judgment from which the appeal was taken. In all other respects the judgment, until annulled or reversed, is binding upon the parties as to every question directly decided. Nill et al. v. Comparet, 16 Ind. 107. We think the court below erred in overruling the demurrer to the answer, and in dismissing the suit.

¶4The judgment is reversed, with costs, and the cause remanded, with directions to sustain the demurrer to the answer, and for further proceedings.

/28/ind/342 · .json · Public domain