Wilson v. Sentman

Decision Date29 January 1919
Docket NumberNo. 10394.,10394.
PartiesWILSON et ux. v. SENTMAN et al.
CourtIndiana Appellate Court

OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE

Appeal from Circuit Court, Montgomery County; I. E. Schoonover, Judge.

Action by John E. Wilson and wife against Edgar A. Sentman and wife and the Farmers' Bank of Wingate. From the judgment rendered, plaintiffs appeal, and defendants move to dismiss the appeal. Motion overruled.

Allen Boulds, of Lafayette, and W. A. Collings and W. J. Sprow, both of Crawfordsville, for appellants.

Thomas, Foley & Lindley, of Crawfordsville, for appellees.

BATMAN, P. J.

[1][2][3] The transcript in this appeal was filed in this court on August 13, 1918. On November 8, 1918, appellees filed their objections to the record, and motion to dismiss the appeal. In support of this motion, appellees cite the fact that the record discloses that the only error assigned is based on the action of the court in overruling appellants' motion for a new trial; that the motion for a new trial does not have any memorandum attached thereto, specifying the reason or reasons why such motion should be sustained, as required by section 5 of the act of 1917 concerning civil procedure. Acts 1917, p. 526. Appellees insist that by reason of these facts the record fails to present any question for the determination of this court. This contention requires that we determine whether said section 5 of the act of 1917 applies to a motion for a new trial. In determining this question, it is our duty to ascertain the legislative intent and give effect thereto. Section 585, Burns 1914, makes provision for granting new trials, and prescribes the grounds therefor. Section 588, Burns 1914, provides that an application for a new trial must be by motion, upon written causes filed at the time of making the motion. The causes therefore must be based on the grounds prescribed in said section 585, and no others will be considered. Over v. Dehne (1906) 38 Ind. App. 427, 75 N. E. 664, 76 N. E. 883. It will thus be seen that at the time said section 5 of the act of 1917 was enacted, and for a long time prior thereto, certain statutes existed, which make essentially the same requirements with reference to a motion for a new trial as are specified in said section. True, said prior statutes provide for written causes for a new trial to be filed at the time of making the motion therefor, while the act of 1917 provides for attaching a memorandum to a motion stating the reasons why it should be sustained; but the object to be accomplished by each is the same, and hence the mere difference in form is not of controlling importance. In view of the above facts,...

To continue reading

Request your trial
8 cases
  • Ohio Farmers' Ins. Co. v. Dobbs, 10299.
    • United States
    • Indiana Appellate Court
    • April 6, 1920
    ...trial presents no question, for the reason that there is no memorandum attached thereto. There is nothing in this contention. Wilson v. Sentman, 121 N. E. 669; Montfort v. Ind., etc., Trac. Co., 126 N. E. 682. Other technical objections to appellant's brief are presented, but with the amend......
  • Monfort v. Indianapolis & Cincinnati Traction Co.
    • United States
    • Indiana Supreme Court
    • December 2, 1920
    ...sustained as required by section 5 of the act of 1917 concerning civil procedure. Acts 1917, p. 526. The appellate court held in Wilson v. Sentman, 121 N. E. 669, that said section did not apply to a motion for a new trial, and we are content with that ruling. [2] In view of the evidence ap......
  • Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Railway Co. v. Williamson
    • United States
    • Indiana Appellate Court
    • May 27, 1919
  • Ohio Farmers Insurance Company v. Dobbs
    • United States
    • Indiana Appellate Court
    • April 6, 1920
    ... ... new trial presents no question, for the reason that there is ... no memorandum attached thereto. There is nothing in this ... contention. Wilson v. Sentman (1920), ... ante, 112, 121 N.E. 669; Monfort v ... Indianapolis, etc., Traction Co. (1920), (Ind.) 128 ... N.E. 842. Other technical ... ...
  • 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