Getchel v. The Chicago Junction Railway Co.

Decision Date24 June 1902
Docket Number4,326
PartiesGETCHEL v. THE CHICAGO JUNCTION RAILWAY COMPANY
CourtIndiana Appellate Court

From Porter Superior Court; H. B. Tuthill, Judge.

Action by Edward A. Getchel against the Chicago Junction Railway Company for damages for personal injuries. From a judgment for defendant, plaintiff appeals.

Affirmed.

C. F Griffin, for appellant.

A. W Hatch, Winston & Meagher, F. R. Babcock and S. H. Strawn for appellee.

OPINION

BLACK, J.

In the appellant's action against the appellee for the recovery of damages for a personal injury, a verdict was returned in favor of the appellee, and the court overruled the appellant's motion for a new trial. This ruling is assigned as error. The causes for a new trial were stated in the motion thus: "(1) That the court erred in sustaining the defendant's motion to instruct the jury to find for the defendant; to which ruling of the court the plaintiff at the time objected and excepted; (2) that the court erred in instructing the jury in said cause, over plaintiff's objection, to find for the defendant; to which ruling and instruction of the court the plaintiff at the time objected and excepted." The motion referred to in the first cause for a new trial was in substance a request of the defendant for an instruction, and the mere sustaining of the motion worked no injury; but the substantial and available error, if any, was in instructing the jury to find for the defendant. To present such action of the court on appeal it was necessary to bring into the record the court's direction to the jury in some legitimate method for making an instruction to the jury a part of the record. Hall v. Durham, 109 Ind. 434, 9 N.E. 926; Jacobs v. Jolley, 29 Ind.App. 25, 62 N.E. 1028.

The appellant has sought to make the action of the court part of the record by bill of exceptions, wherein the instruction is set out. The bill is one containing also the evidence as reported and transcribed by the official reporter of the court, being an original bill. The original bill of exceptions which under the statute (Acts 1897, p. 244, § 638a Burns 1901) may be embraced in the transcript on appeal instead of a copy thereof, is one containing the evidence and all rulings of the court in respect to the admission and rejection of evidence, and the competency of witnesses, and the objections and exceptions thereto. Instructions given or refused can not be...

To continue reading

Request your trial
23 cases
  • Abernathy v. McCoy
    • United States
    • Indiana Appellate Court
    • December 23, 1926
    ... ... the jury to find for appellee," citing Getchel ... v. Chicago, etc., R. Co. (1902), 29 Ind.App. 410, 64 ... N.E ... ...
  • Abernathy v. McCoy
    • United States
    • Indiana Appellate Court
    • December 23, 1926
    ...but the substantial and available error, if any, was in instructing the jury to find for appellee”-citing Getchel v. Chicago, etc., Ry. Co., 29 Ind. App. 410, 64 N. E. 618. In Cook & Bernheimer Co. v. Hagedorn, 82 Ind. App. 444, 131 N. E. 788, the appellant had, at the close of all the evid......
  • Chicago Furniture Co. v. Cronk
    • United States
    • Indiana Appellate Court
    • June 2, 1905
    ... ... See ... Andrysiak v. Satkoski (1902), 159 Ind. 428, ... 63 N.E. 854; Getchel v. Chicago Junction R ... Co. (1902), 29 Ind.App. 410, 64 N.E. 618; Prudential ... Ins. Co. v ... ...
  • Bartley v. Chicago & E.I. Ry. Co.
    • United States
    • Indiana Supreme Court
    • May 28, 1942
    ... ... peremptory instruction to return a verdict for the ... defendants.' Appellees, citing Getchel v. Chicago ... Junction Ry. Co., 1902, 29 Ind.App. 410, 411, 64 N.E ... 618, and Cook, etc., Co ... ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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