Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

37 Ind. 122

Winterrowd v. Messick

Indiana Supreme Court

Decided November 15, 1871

Indiana Supreme Court · decided 1871-11-15

<p>Judge.—Special Appointment.—Appeal.—Although the record shows that three different judges successively sat, during the making of the issues and trial of a cause, without any evidence in the record of their appointment, the question as to their qualification cannot he raised for the first time on appeal.</p>

Relies on Feaster v. Woodfill · Watts v. State · Hyatt v. Hyatt

Decided 1871-11-15

Downey, J.

¶1There' is no question in this'case, except that the record shows that three different judges sat, successively, during the making of the issues and trial of the cause, without any evidence in the record of their appointment.

¶2No objection was made, or question reserved, in the court below with reference to the appointment or qualifications of the gentlemen who held the court.

¶3Under the later rulings of this court, the question cannot be presented, now for the first time. Feaster v. Woodfill, 23 Ind. 493; Hyatt v. Hyatt, 33 Ind. 309; Watts v. The State, 33 Ind. 237.

¶4The judgment is affirmed, with five per cént. damages and costs.

/37/ind/122 · .json · Public domain