School City of Peru v. State ex rel. Youngblood, 26663.
| Docket Nº | 26663. |
| Citation | 9 N.E.2d 80, 212 Ind. 255 |
| Case Date | June 02, 1937 |
| Court | Supreme Court of Indiana |
SCHOOL CITY OF PERU et al.
v.
STATE ex rel. YOUNGBLOOD.
No. 26663.
Supreme Court of Indiana
June 2, 1937
[212 Ind. 256] Appeal from Cass Circuit Court; John B. Smith, Judge.
C. Y. Andrews, L. O. Arnold, O. F. Rhodes, all of Peru, McHale, Arthur & Myers, of Logansport, and Adelbert W. Matt, of Peru, for appellant.
Hurd J. Hurst, of Peru, Ben Long, of Logansport, and Joseph Tillett and Russel J. Wildman, both of Peru, for appellee.
TREMAIN, Judge.
In his petition for a rehearing the appellee insists that no question is presented to this court for the reason that the appellants filed a motion in arrest of judgment prior to the filing the motion for a new trial. Authorities are cited to sustain that proposition. Watson's Revision of Works Practice and Forms, Vol. 2, § 1907, collects many authorities sustaining this proposition, and then says:
[212 Ind. 269] 'So long as this rule stands, a motion in arrest of judgment should not be made until after a motion for a new trial, if it is desired to make one, but the rule should be changed, as there is no more reason why filing a motion in arrest of judgment should preclude the filing of a motion for a new trial than there is that a motion for a venire de novo or a motion for judgment on the answers to interrogatories should have that effect. The rule was established by the common law and never should have been applied after the adoption of the code.'
However, the case at bar does not present a situation where this rule is applicable. The record in this case discloses that on the same day three motions were filed in the lower court: (1) A motion to modify the findings of the court, (2) a motion in arrest of judgment, and (3) a motion for a new trial. After argument of counsel and consideration, these motions were overruled simultaneously. Since the motions were filed together and ruled upon at the same time, this court will indulge in the presumption that the trial court followed the rule of practice long in force in this state, [9 N.E.2d 81] and considered the motion in arrest of judgment as having been filed after the motion for a new trial. It has been held that where the two motions are filed and pending at the same time, and there being nothing to the contrary, it will be presumed that they were ruled upon in their proper order. Elliott's General Practice, Vol. 2, § 995; Habersham v. Wetter, 59 Ga. 11; Pope v. Latham, 1 Ark. 66; Jewell v. Blandford, 7...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Lost Creek Sch. Tp., Vigo Cnty. v. York, 26965.
...agreement and that such agreement was not a necessary exhibit to the complaint. In School City of Peru v. State ex rel. Youngblood, 1937, 212 Ind. 255, pages 261, 262,7 N.E.2d 176, at page 178, 1002,9 N.E.2d 80, we said: ‘There is nothing in the [Teachers' Tenure] act specifying a particula......
-
Lost Creek School Tp., Vigo County v. York, 26965.
...agreement and that such agreement was not a necessary exhibit to the complaint. In School City of Peru v. State ex rel. Youngblood, 1937, 212 Ind. 255, pages 261, 262, 7 N.E.2d 176, at page 178, 1002, 9 N.E.2d 80, we said: 'There is nothing in the [Teachers' Tenure] act specifying a particu......
-
Sch. City of Peru v. State ex rel. Youngblood, 26663.
...212 Ind. 2559 N.E.2d 80SCHOOL CITY OF PERU et al.v.STATE ex rel. YOUNGBLOOD.No. 26663.Supreme Court of Indiana.June 2, On motion for rehearing. Motion overruled. For former opinion, see 7 N.E.(2d) 176; dissenting opinion, 7 N.E.(2d) 1002. TREANOR, J., dissenting. [9 N.E.2d 80]Appeal from Ca......
-
Zellers v. City of South Bend, 27860.
...the board of public works and safety, public service commission and similar boards. School City of Peru v. State ex rel. Youngblood, 1937, 212 Ind. 255, 267, 7 N.E.2d 176, 181, 1002, 9 N.E.2d 80. The charges against appellants are based on one of the reasons given in the statute for which t......