Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

47 Ind. 258

Cline v. Love

Indiana Supreme Court

Decided May 15, 1874

Indiana Supreme Court · decided 1874-05-15

<p>Assignment of Error.—Appeal from Superior Court.—On appeal to the Supreme Court from a superior court, the assignment of error should be based upon the action of the lower court in general term, in affirming the ruling at special term. An assignment that the court in special term erred in overruling a motion for a new trial presents no question.</p>

Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently October 1886

5 state decisions

Relies on Bush v. Bush · Wesley v. Milford · Carney v. Street

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1874-05-15

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Buskirk, J.

¶1This was an action by the appellants against the appellee, to recover the possession of certain real estate, and to quiet the title thereto.

¶2There was issue and trial by the court in special term, and a finding and judgment in favor of the appellee. From this judgment, the appellants appealed to the general term, where the júdgment of the special term was affirmed.

¶3From the judgment of the general term, the appellants appealed to this court, and have assigned for error here, that the court in special term erred in overruling his motion for a new trial.

¶4It is well settled by repeated decisions of this court, that such an assignment of error presents no question for decision in this court. The assignment of error should have been based upon the action of the general term, in affirming *259■the ruling of the special term. Carney v. Street, 41 Ind. 396; Wesley v. Milford, 41 Ind. 413; Farman v. Ratcliff, 42 Ind. 537; Van Dusen v. Kindleburger, 44 Ind. 282; Linsman v. Huggins, 44 Ind. 474; Bush v. Bush, 46 Ind. 70.

¶5There is no question presented for our decision.

¶6The judgment is affirmed, with costs.

/47/ind/258 · .json · Public domain