Isler v. Bland
| Citation | 20 N.E. 303, 117 Ind. 457 |
| Case Date | February 23, 1889 |
| Court | Supreme Court of Indiana |
117 Ind. 457
20 N.E. 303
Isler
v.
Bland.
Supreme Court of Indiana.
February 23, 1889.
Appeal from circuit court, Miami county; James D. Conner, Judge.
Effinger & Loveland and S. D. Carpenter, for appellant. Charles R. Pence and Walker & McClintic, for appellee.
Mitchell, J.
This was an action by Lottie Bland against Jonathan Isler, to recover the amount of a promissory note executed by the latter as maker to the former as payee. Answers setting up want of consideration, payment, set-off, and the general denial, were pleaded, and after issue joined there was a trial by jury, and a verdict for the plaintiff.
There is no question upon the pleadings in the case. The controversy here relates almost exclusively to the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain the verdict of the jury. After setting out the substance of the evidence given by the parties respectively, it is conceded that if the cause rested upon the testimony of the parties the appellant must fail, because, having the burden of the issue, and both being entitled to equal credit, there is no preponderance. In other words, it is conceded that the plaintiff's testimony, if believed, supports the verdict of the jury, but the erroneous assumption is indulged that this court will examine and weigh the evidence of all the witnesses, with a view of ascertaining upon which side it preponderates. It has often been held that this will not be done, and that where there is evidence in the record which tends to support the verdict a reversal will not follow, even though the evidence as a whole seemed to preponderate overwhelmingly against the conclusion of the jury. Hammond v. Schweitzer, 112 Ind. 246, 13 N. E. Rep. 869. In such a case, this court acts upon the presumption that there was something in the conduct or appearance of the witnesses, or other circumstances of the trial, which the opportunities of the jury and the judge at nisi prius enabled them to discover, and which could not be conveyed to this court, fully justifying the verdict, even though that was contrary to what might seem to be the weight of the evidence. Where competent evidence appears in the record which, if true, tends to sustain the verdict and judgment, unless it is of such a character as that to believe it would involve an absurd or unreasonable conclusion, no matter how much the evidence is contradicted, it will support the verdict, nevertheless. Insurance Co. v. Yung, 113 Ind. 159, 15 N. E. Rep. 220. What has been said disposes...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Yeager & Sullivan, Inc. v. O'Neill, No. 3--873A100
...Bailey v. Washington Theatre Co. (1942), 112 Ind.App. 336, at 343, 41 N.E.2d 819, at 821 (transfer denied); Isler v. Bland (1889), 117 Ind. 457, 20 N.E. 303; Norman v. Norman (1960), 131 Ind.App. 67, 169 N.E.2d Under direct examination, Smith testified that excluding any consideration of od......
-
Dunn v. State
...as fully designates the question sought to be presented for consideration.” In the still later case of Isler v. Bland, 117 Ind. 455, 459, 20 N. E. 303, it was said: “There can be no deviation from the well-settled rule which requires that a motion for a new trial, in order to present any qu......
-
Bitner v. Bitner, No. 28641
...538, 165 N.E. 323; Cottrell v. Shadley, 1881, 77 Ind. 348, 353; Gallimore v. Blankenship, 1885, 99 Ind. 390, 391; Isler v. Bland, 1889, 117 Ind. 457, 458, 20 N.E. 303; Crawford v. Anderson, 1891, 129 Ind. 117, 119, 28 [228 Ind. 268] N.E. 314; Deal v. State, 1895, 140 Ind. 354, 356, 358, 39 ......
-
City of Tipton v. Freeman, No. 6,493.
...trial court, unless it should clearly appear that substantial justice has not been done. Christy v. Holmes, 57 Ind. 314;Isler v. Bland, 117 Ind. 457, 20 N. E. 303;Lake Erie R. R. Co. v. Stick, 143 Ind. 449, 41 N. E. 365;Rarick v. Ulmer, 144 Ind. 25, 42 N. E. 1099;Parkison v. Thompson, 164 I......
-
Yeager & Sullivan, Inc. v. O'Neill, No. 3--873A100
...Bailey v. Washington Theatre Co. (1942), 112 Ind.App. 336, at 343, 41 N.E.2d 819, at 821 (transfer denied); Isler v. Bland (1889), 117 Ind. 457, 20 N.E. 303; Norman v. Norman (1960), 131 Ind.App. 67, 169 N.E.2d Under direct examination, Smith testified that excluding any consideration of od......
-
Dunn v. State
...as fully designates the question sought to be presented for consideration.” In the still later case of Isler v. Bland, 117 Ind. 455, 459, 20 N. E. 303, it was said: “There can be no deviation from the well-settled rule which requires that a motion for a new trial, in order to present any qu......
-
Bitner v. Bitner, No. 28641
...538, 165 N.E. 323; Cottrell v. Shadley, 1881, 77 Ind. 348, 353; Gallimore v. Blankenship, 1885, 99 Ind. 390, 391; Isler v. Bland, 1889, 117 Ind. 457, 458, 20 N.E. 303; Crawford v. Anderson, 1891, 129 Ind. 117, 119, 28 [228 Ind. 268] N.E. 314; Deal v. State, 1895, 140 Ind. 354, 356, 358, 39 ......
-
City of Tipton v. Freeman, No. 6,493.
...trial court, unless it should clearly appear that substantial justice has not been done. Christy v. Holmes, 57 Ind. 314;Isler v. Bland, 117 Ind. 457, 20 N. E. 303;Lake Erie R. R. Co. v. Stick, 143 Ind. 449, 41 N. E. 365;Rarick v. Ulmer, 144 Ind. 25, 42 N. E. 1099;Parkison v. Thompson, 164 I......