Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

48 Ind. App. 172

Morton v. Gaffield

Indiana Court of Appeals

Decided June 27, 1911

Indiana Court of Appeals · decided 1911-06-27

Prom Jasper Circuit Court; G. W. Hanley, Judge. Action by William P. G-affield against James T. Morton and another. Prom a judgment for plaintiff, defendant James T. Morton appeals. On motion to dismiss the appeal. (For final decision, see — Ind. App. —.)

Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently March 1915

2 state decisions

Relies on Keiser v. Mills · Gunn v. Haworth · Baltes Land, Stone & Oil Co. v. Sutton

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Motion overruled · Decided 1911-06-27

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Hottel, J.

¶1Appellee filed a motion to dismiss this appeal, for the reason that appellant had failed to make all the parties against whom judgment was rendered parties to this appeal.

¶2The judgment herein was rendered against appellant, James T. Morton, for $120, and against George A. Williams, a garnishee eodefendant. Appellant has not joined with him, in his appeal, his said garnishee codefendant, and has not named him in his assignment of errors.

¶3This is a term-time appeal, perfected, as such, under §679 Burns 1908, §638 R. S. 1881. Section 675 Burns 1908, Acts 1895 p. 179, §1, provides that “a part of any number of coparties against whom a judgment has been taken” may appeal from such judgment to the Supreme or Appellate Court without making the “coparties not appealing, parties to the appeal, and it shall not be necessary to name them as appellants or appellees in the assignment of errors.” See Keiser v. Mills (1904), 162 Ind. 366; Gunn v. Haworth *173(1902), 159 Ind. 419; Baltes Land, etc., Co. v. Sutton (1903), 32 Ind. App. 14.

¶4The eases cited and relied on by appellee apply to appeals other than term-time appeals.

¶5The motion to dismiss the appeal is therefore overruled.

/48/indapp/172 · .json · Public domain