Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

8 Blackf. 385

Wright v. State ex rel. Howe

Indiana Supreme Court

Decided May 28, 1847

Indiana Supreme Court · decided 1847-05-28

Relies on Eaton v. Benefield · Crouch v. Martin · Van Benthuysen v. De Witt

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1847-05-28

How this case has been cited

Cited by 3 later decisions — most recently February 1982

3 state decisions

10184718501860187018801890190019101920193019401950196019701980decided

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 →

¶1DEBT by the state, on the relation of A., against B. on his bond as administrator. The declaration stated that the reíator was a creditor of the estate, but it did not allege that he had recovered a judgment against the estate, nor did it show the nature or amount of his demand. Held, that the declaration was insufficient. Eaton v. Benefield et al. 2 Blackf. 52.

¶2Where in such suit there are several issues in fact, a verdict, in general terms, “ for the plaintiff” may be valid; but a verdict in such case as to only one of the issues, not noticing the others, is bad. Crouch v. Martin, 3 Blackf. 256.—Hanna et al. v. Ewing et al. Id. 34.—Patterson v. Salmon, Id. 131. —Fitch v. Dunn, Id. 142.—Huff v. Gilbert, 4 id. 19. Van Benthuysen v. De Witt, 4 Johns. 213.

/8/blackf/385 · .json · Public domain