The School City of Noblesville v. Heinzman
| Decision Date | 26 September 1895 |
| Docket Number | 1,503 |
| Citation | 41 N.E. 464,13 Ind.App. 195 |
| Parties | THE SCHOOL CITY OF NOBLESVILLE v. HEINZMAN ET AL |
| Court | Indiana Appellate Court |
From the Tipton Circuit Court.
Judgment affirmed.
S. D Stuart, G. Shirts and I. A. Kilbourne, for appellant.
J. C Blacklidge, C. C. Shirley, B. C. Moon, R. B. Beauchamp and W W. Mount, for appellees.
ROSS, J. DAVIS, J., took no part in the decision of this case.
The appellees sued and recovered judgment against the appellant for a balance alleged to be due them upon a contract for the building of a schoolhouse in the city of Noblesville, Indiana.
Two specifications of error have been assigned by appellant, as follows:
These specifications of error will be taken up and considered in the inverse order of their assignment.
The cross-complaint filed by appellant declared upon a bond given pursuant to the terms of the contract sued on to secure the faithful performance by appellees of their part thereof, alleging a breach and asking damages therefor as provided in said contract. To this cross-complaint the appellees answered in two paragraphs: first, a general denial, and, second, specially alleging facts to show not only that the delay alleged in the cross-complaint was caused by the acts of appellant, but that subsequent to the making of the contract, that part thereof upon which the appellant sought a recovery in its cross-complaint had by agreement been changed, etc.
The appellees insist that the court below did not err in overruling the demurrer to this answer. In support of this contention it is urged that the paper filed and denominated a demurrer is insufficient to raise any question as to the sufficiency of the answer to constitute a defense to the cause of action alleged in the cross-complaint.
The demurrer, omitting the caption, reads as follows:
"Comes now the cross-complaint and demurs to the second paragraph of answer to cross-complaint, and says that said paragraph does not contain facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action."
That the demurrer is insufficient in form and does not test the sufficiency of the facts alleged in the answer to constitute a defense to the cause of action alleged in the cross-complaint, we think...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Sch. City of Noblesville v. Keinzmann
... ... 26, 1895 ... Appeal from circuit court, Tipton county; L. J. Kirkpatrick, Judge.Action by George W. Keinzmann and others against the school city of Noblesville to recover a balance alleged to be due on a building contract. From a judgment for plaintiffs, defendant appeals. Affirmed.Shirts ... ...