Crowell v. Jeffries, No. 11177.

Docket NºNo. 11177.
Citation79 Ind.App. 513, 137 N.E. 556
Case DateDecember 13, 1922
CourtCourt of Appeals of Indiana

79 Ind.App. 513
137 N.E. 556

CROWELL et al.
v.
JEFFRIES.

No. 11177.*

Appellate Court of Indiana, Division No. 2.

Dec. 13, 1922.


Appeal from Circuit Court, Decatur County.

On petition for rehearing. Rehearing denied.


[137 N.E. 557]

For former opinion, see 134 N. E. 908.

McMAHAN, J.

There is no merit in appellee's contention that the evidence is not in the record. It appears from an order book entry that within the time allowed the bill of exceptions was presented to the trial judge in open court, and by him approved, signed, and ordered made a part of the record, and that such bill of exceptions, having been so signed and ordered made a part of the record, was then “filed in the office of the clerk of said court and made a part of the record of said cause, which said bill of exceptions, containing the evidence, is in the words and figures, to wit.”

[1] This is a sufficient compliance with section 657, Burns' 1914, which requires that it shall appear from the record that the bill was presented to the trial judge for his signature in proper time, and “that the same was signed by the judge and filed with the clerk of said trial court or in open court.” Wabash Paper Co. v. Webb, 146 Ind. 303, 45 N. E. 474;Baker v. State, 174 Ind. 708, 93 N. E. 14.

Appellee's next contention is that since the first and third paragraphs of complaint stated separate and distinct causes of action, there was no error in overruling the motion for a new trial, which was not limited to the issues presented by the first paragraph of complaint. This is upon the assumption that the failure of the jury to find in favor of appellee on the third paragraph of complaint was a finding in favor of appellants in so far as that paragraph was concerned, and that appellants were not entitled to a new trial upon the issues presented by that paragraph.

The court submitted a number of forms of verdicts to the jury, but no form of verdict was submitted for the guidance of the jury in case it found in favor of appellee on but one paragraph of his complaint. Neither did the court give the jury any instructions as to its duty or the form of its verdict under such circumstances.

We have here a case where two separate and distinct causes of action were stated in separate paragraphs of complaint, trial by jury and a general verdict returned as to the issues presented by one paragraph, and no verdict returned as to the issues presented by the other paragraph.

Appellee assumes that the failure of the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
2 practice notes
  • Woodhouse v. Woodhouse
    • United States
    • Vermont United States State Supreme Court of Vermont
    • October 7, 1925
    ...222 Mass. 198, 110 N. E. 285; McLery v. McLery, 186 Wis. 137, 202 N. W. 156; Crowell v. Jeffries, 79 Ind. App. 513, 134 N. E. 908, 137 N. E. 556; note 46 L. R. A. (N. S.) It follows that the quo animo is the important consideration where parents are charged with alienating the affections of......
  • Kline v. Indiana Trust Co. , No. 11300.
    • United States
    • Indiana Court of Appeals of Indiana
    • December 15, 1922
    ...the value of said improvements with interest, and prays that her title to said real estate may be quieted and set at rest against any and [137 N.E. 556]all claims of appellees and each of them for a period of 20 years from August 20, 1911, and for all other and proper relief. [1][2] Appelle......
2 cases
  • Woodhouse v. Woodhouse
    • United States
    • Vermont United States State Supreme Court of Vermont
    • October 7, 1925
    ...222 Mass. 198, 110 N. E. 285; McLery v. McLery, 186 Wis. 137, 202 N. W. 156; Crowell v. Jeffries, 79 Ind. App. 513, 134 N. E. 908, 137 N. E. 556; note 46 L. R. A. (N. S.) It follows that the quo animo is the important consideration where parents are charged with alienating the affections of......
  • Kline v. Indiana Trust Co. , No. 11300.
    • United States
    • Indiana Court of Appeals of Indiana
    • December 15, 1922
    ...the value of said improvements with interest, and prays that her title to said real estate may be quieted and set at rest against any and [137 N.E. 556]all claims of appellees and each of them for a period of 20 years from August 20, 1911, and for all other and proper relief. [1][2] Appelle......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT