5 Ind. 429
Decided December 4, 1854
Indiana Supreme Court · decided 1854-12-04
<p>A judgment will not be reversed for the insufficiency of the evidence, where the record does not profess to contain all that was given.</p> <p>A motion in arrest of judgment supersedes a motion for a new trial.</p>
Relies on Rogers v. Maxwell · Elder v. Robins · Montgomery v. Doe on the demise of Pearson
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 1854-12-04
Cited by 3 later decisions — most recently May 1947
3 state decisions
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 →
¶1Case for slanderous words. Verdict and judgment for the plaintiff.
¶2The record does not purport to contain all the evidence.
¶3Elder v. Robins, 2 Ind. 210.—Montgomery v. Doe d. Pearson, 4 Ind. 266. And even if it did, the party moving for a new trial superseded that motion by a motion in arrest of judgment. Rogers v. Maxwell, 4 Ind. 243.—Bepley v. The State, id. 264.
¶4We see nothing in the record which the latter motion would reach.
¶5Per Curiam. — The judgment is affirmed with costs.