Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

76 Ind. App. 563

State ex rel. Horall v. Jacobs

Indiana Court of Appeals

Decided November 2, 1921

Indiana Court of Appeals · decided 1921-11-02

From Daviess Circuit Court; James W. Ogdon, Judge. Action by the State of Indiana, on the relation of Thomas H. Horall, against Thomas Jacobs and another. From the judgment rendered, the plaintiff appeals.

Cited by 3 later decisions — most recently May 1926

3 state decisions

Relies on Barnes v. Wagener · Daegling v. Strauss · Wayne Sewer & Drain Co. v. Ward Cowen Constraction Co.

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Appeal dismissed · Decided 1921-11-02

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Enloe, C. J.

¶1Thomas Jacobs, named as one of the appellees herein, had taken a contract for the construction of a public drain. He filed his bond as such contractor with appellee indemnity company as surety thereon.- The relator instituted suit on said bond against both of said parties, alleging a breach thereof, in ■ that said contractor did not complete said ditch within the time specified in his contract. Service was had upon both defendants, and both appeared and defended. Various motions were filed by said-defendants relating to the complaint of appellant, and after rulings on these motions, the appellee indemnity company, filed its separate demurrer to the complaint, which demurrer was sustained. The appellant refusing to further plead, the court rendered judgment against him and in favor of the appellee indemnity company, for its costs, from which judgment this appeal is prosecuted.

¶2The appellee indemnity company has moved to dismiss this appeal as not having been taken from a final judgment, the merits of said complaint as to said Jacobs, yet remaining undisposed of. This motion must be sustained. Barnes V. Wagener (1907), 169 Ind. 511, 82 N. E. 1037; Daegling v. Strauss (1915), 59 Ind. App. 672, 109 N. E. 920; Wayne Sewer, etc. v. Ward Cowen Constr. Co. (1919), 72 Ind. App. 437, 125 N. E. 84. The right of appeal being statutory, and there being no final judgment, we do not have jurisdiction of the subject-matter of this appeal.

¶3Appeal dismissed.

/76/indapp/563 · .json · Public domain