Adams v. Bd. of Com'rs of Whitley Cnty.
| Decision Date | 11 January 1905 |
| Citation | 72 N.E. 1029,164 Ind. 108 |
| Parties | ADAMS v. BOARD OF COM'RS OF WHITLEY COUNTY. |
| Court | Indiana Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Appeal from Circuit Court, Whitley County; J. H. Rose, Special Judge.
Action by Andrew A. Adams against the board of commissioners of Whitley county. From a judgment sustaining a demurrer to the complaint, complainant appeals. Affirmed.
T. R. Marshall, W. F. McNaguy, and P. H. Clugston, for appellant. B. E. Gates and D. V. Whiteleather, for appellee.
The assignment of errors is that the court below erred in sustaining the demurrer of the appellee to appellant's complaint. It is sought by this appeal to determine the constitutionality of section 27 of “An act concerning county business” (Acts 1899, p. 352, c. 154), and that question has been argued in the briefs on file with signal ability. A reference to the record, however, discloses the fact that no exception was taken or reserved to the ruling of the court upon appellee's demurrer to the complaint. An exception, taken in some form in the court below to the ruling, is indispensable to bring the question judicially before the Supreme Court. If not taken at the proper time, and shown by the record, the exception is waived, and this court cannot review the ruling. Zehnor v. Beard, 8 Ind. 96;Johnson v. Hatch et al., 10 Ind. 7;City of Evansville v. Martin et al., 103 Ind. 206, 2 N. E. 596.
No other alleged error is presented, and the judgment must be affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Masterson v. Southern Ry. Co.
...action for the first time in this court. Train v. Gridley, 36 Ind. 241, 247;Teal et al. v. Spangler, 72 Ind. 381, 383;Adams v. Board, etc., 164 Ind. 108, 72 N. E. 1029. The granting of appellees' motion for judgment upon the special interrogatories and answers ipso facto annulled and vacate......
-
Masterson v. Southern Railway Company
... ... 241, 247; Teal v. Spangler ... (1880), 72 Ind. 380, 383; Adams v. Board, ... etc. (1905), 164 Ind. 108, 72 N.E. 1029 ... ...
-
Vest v. State
... ... accordingly not presented for review upon this appeal ... Adams" v. Board, etc., (1905), 164 Ind. 108, ... 72 N.E. 1029 ... \xC2" ... ...
-
Vest v. State
...overruling of her motion for a new trial. The question suggested is accordingly not presented for review upon this appeal. Adams v. Board, 164 Ind. 108, 72 N. E. 1029. Our statutes in relation to criminal procedure provide “that every motion in writing offered to be filed *** whether receiv......