Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
15 Indiana opinions name it 2 courts 1891–1996 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Indiana courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No positive-treatment citations attached to this issue in Indiana. | ||
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Indiana. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Cole v. Lafontaine
neutral
2 sentences1921Cole v. Lafontaine (1882), 84 Ind. 446 ; Jackson v. Weaver (1884), 98 Ind. 307 . 1917Cole, Admr., v. Lafontaine (1882), 84 Ind. 446, 449 ; Scherer v. Ingerman, Admr. (1887), 110 Ind. 428, 437 , 11 N. E. 8 , 12 N. E. 304 ; O’Haleran v. O’Haleran (1888), 115 Ind. 493, 494 , 17 N. E. 917 . | 2 | 1917–1921 |
Goodbub v. Estate of Hornung
green
2 sentences1996With respect to the allowance of a claim, "(tlhe statute fixes the order of priority of claims, and this the court cannot change." Goodbub v. Hornung's Estate (1891), 127 Ind. 181 , 26 N.E. 770 , 77l. 1996With respect to the allowance of a claim, "(tlhe statute fixes the order of priority of claims, and this the court cannot change." Goodbub v. Hornung's Estate (1891), 127 Ind. 181 , 26 N.E. 770 , 77l. | 1 | 1996–1996 |
Rosenbaum v. Dutton
green
1 sentence1981To support its argument the University cites 11 U.S.C. § 502 (d) and Rosenbaum v. Dutton, (8th Cir. 1913) 203 F. 838 . 11 U.S.C. § 502 (d) provides that proven claims shall be allowed unless parties in interest object to their allowance. | 1 | 1981–1981 |
Price v. Engle
neutral
2 sentences1968“Since the statute requires that the clerk keep a record showing the filing of all claims against estates and of the allowance or disallowance of the same, and requires that the action of the executor or administrator in allowing or disallowing all claims be in writing, we hold that the allowance of a claim must be proven by the record, and that when the record does not show an allowance that the intention of the administrator to allow the claim cannot be proven by oral testimony.” Price v. Engle (1922), 77 Ind. App. 439, 447 , 133 N. E. 755 , No question has been presented to us concerning ap 1968“Since the statute requires that the clerk keep a record showing the filing of all claims against estates and of the allowance or disallowance of the same, and requires that the action of the executor or administrator in allowing or disallowing all claims be in writing, we hold that the allowance of a claim must be proven by the record, and that when the record does not show an allowance that the intention of the administrator to allow the claim cannot be proven by oral testimony.” Price v. Engle (1922), 77 Ind. App. 439, 447 , 133 N. E. 755 , No question has been presented to us concerning ap | 1 | 1968–1968 |
Keppel v. Tiffin Savings Bank
green
2 sentences1937We quote at length what the court said upon this proposition (p. 760) : “The Supreme Court of the United States has lately held, in Keppel v. Tiffin Savings Bank, 197 U. S. 356 , 25 Sup. Ct. 443, 49 L. 1937We quote at length what the court said upon this proposition (p. 760) : “The Supreme Court of the United States has lately held, in Keppel v. Tiffin Savings Bank, 197 U. S. 356 , 25 Sup. Ct. 443, 49 L. | 1 | 1937–1937 |
Adam v. Board of Commissioners
neutral
2 sentences1927In many respects, however, the action of the board is as binding on the claimant as is a judgment, and unless resort is had to one of the two statutory remedies above mentioned, the action of the board is conclusive against the claimant.” In Adams v. Board, etc. (1917), 66 Ind. App. 48 , 117 N. E. 876 , the court, in discussing the right of a party to bring an action on a claim where there had been an allowance of the claim in a sum which was in fact intended only as a partial payment, and where the parties, at' the time of the allowance, entered into a supplemental agreement concerning the fi 1927In many respects, however, the action of the board is as binding on the claimant as is a judgment, and unless resort is had to one of the two statutory remedies above mentioned, the action of the board is conclusive against the claimant.” In Adams v. Board, etc. (1917), 66 Ind. App. 48 , 117 N. E. 876 , the court, in discussing the right of a party to bring an action on a claim where there had been an allowance of the claim in a sum which was in fact intended only as a partial payment, and where the parties, at' the time of the allowance, entered into a supplemental agreement concerning the fi | 1 | 1927–1927 |
Callahan v. Mayor
neutral
1 sentence1924Butler v. Board, etc. (1912), 177 Ind. 440 ; Western, etc., Co. v. Board, etc. (1912), 178 Ind. 684 ; Perry v. Cheboygan (1884), 55 Mich. 250 , 21 N. W. 333 ; Davey v. Big Rapids (1891), 85 Mich. 56 , 48 N. W. 178 ; Callahan v. Mayor, etc. (1875), 6 Daly (N.Y.) 230 ; Paulson v. Ward County (1912), 23 N. D. 601 , 137 N. W. 486 , 42 L. | 1 | 1924–1924 |
Perry v. Village of Cheboygan
neutral
2 sentences1924Butler v. Board, etc. (1912), 177 Ind. 440 ; Western, etc., Co. v. Board, etc. (1912), 178 Ind. 684 ; Perry v. Cheboygan (1884), 55 Mich. 250 , 21 N. W. 333 ; Davey v. Big Rapids (1891), 85 Mich. 56 , 48 N. W. 178 ; Callahan v. Mayor, etc. (1875), 6 Daly (N.Y.) 230 ; Paulson v. Ward County (1912), 23 N. D. 601 , 137 N. W. 486 , 42 L. 1924Butler v. Board, etc. (1912), 177 Ind. 440 ; Western, etc., Co. v. Board, etc. (1912), 178 Ind. 684 ; Perry v. Cheboygan (1884), 55 Mich. 250 , 21 N. W. 333 ; Davey v. Big Rapids (1891), 85 Mich. 56 , 48 N. W. 178 ; Callahan v. Mayor, etc. (1875), 6 Daly (N.Y.) 230 ; Paulson v. Ward County (1912), 23 N. D. 601 , 137 N. W. 486 , 42 L. | 1 | 1924–1924 |
Hubbell v. Rhinesmith & Simonson
neutral
1 sentence1924Butler v. Board, etc. (1912), 177 Ind. 440 ; Western, etc., Co. v. Board, etc. (1912), 178 Ind. 684 ; Perry v. Cheboygan (1884), 55 Mich. 250 , 21 N. W. 333 ; Davey v. Big Rapids (1891), 85 Mich. 56 , 48 N. W. 178 ; Callahan v. Mayor, etc. (1875), 6 Daly (N.Y.) 230 ; Paulson v. Ward County (1912), 23 N. D. 601 , 137 N. W. 486 , 42 L. | 1 | 1924–1924 |
Davey v. City of Big Rapids
neutral
1 sentence1924Butler v. Board, etc. (1912), 177 Ind. 440 ; Western, etc., Co. v. Board, etc. (1912), 178 Ind. 684 ; Perry v. Cheboygan (1884), 55 Mich. 250 , 21 N. W. 333 ; Davey v. Big Rapids (1891), 85 Mich. 56 , 48 N. W. 178 ; Callahan v. Mayor, etc. (1875), 6 Daly (N.Y.) 230 ; Paulson v. Ward County (1912), 23 N. D. 601 , 137 N. W. 486 , 42 L. | 1 | 1924–1924 |
Paulson v. County
green
2 sentences1924Butler v. Board, etc. (1912), 177 Ind. 440 ; Western, etc., Co. v. Board, etc. (1912), 178 Ind. 684 ; Perry v. Cheboygan (1884), 55 Mich. 250 , 21 N. W. 333 ; Davey v. Big Rapids (1891), 85 Mich. 56 , 48 N. W. 178 ; Callahan v. Mayor, etc. (1875), 6 Daly (N.Y.) 230 ; Paulson v. Ward County (1912), 23 N. D. 601 , 137 N. W. 486 , 42 L. 1924Butler v. Board, etc. (1912), 177 Ind. 440 ; Western, etc., Co. v. Board, etc. (1912), 178 Ind. 684 ; Perry v. Cheboygan (1884), 55 Mich. 250 , 21 N. W. 333 ; Davey v. Big Rapids (1891), 85 Mich. 56 , 48 N. W. 178 ; Callahan v. Mayor, etc. (1875), 6 Daly (N.Y.) 230 ; Paulson v. Ward County (1912), 23 N. D. 601 , 137 N. W. 486 , 42 L. | 1 | 1924–1924 |
Butler v. Board of Commissioners
neutral
1 sentence1924Butler v. Board, etc. (1912), 177 Ind. 440 ; Western, etc., Co. v. Board, etc. (1912), 178 Ind. 684 ; Perry v. Cheboygan (1884), 55 Mich. 250 , 21 N. W. 333 ; Davey v. Big Rapids (1891), 85 Mich. 56 , 48 N. W. 178 ; Callahan v. Mayor, etc. (1875), 6 Daly (N.Y.) 230 ; Paulson v. Ward County (1912), 23 N. D. 601 , 137 N. W. 486 , 42 L. | 1 | 1924–1924 |
Western Construction Co. v. Board of Commissioners
green
1 sentence1924Butler v. Board, etc. (1912), 177 Ind. 440 ; Western, etc., Co. v. Board, etc. (1912), 178 Ind. 684 ; Perry v. Cheboygan (1884), 55 Mich. 250 , 21 N. W. 333 ; Davey v. Big Rapids (1891), 85 Mich. 56 , 48 N. W. 178 ; Callahan v. Mayor, etc. (1875), 6 Daly (N.Y.) 230 ; Paulson v. Ward County (1912), 23 N. D. 601 , 137 N. W. 486 , 42 L. | 1 | 1924–1924 |
Dick v. Dumbauld
neutral
2 sentences1922Dick v. Dumbauld (1894), 10 Ind. App. 508 , 38 N. E. 78 . 1922Dick v. Dumbauld (1894), 10 Ind. App. 508 , 38 N. E. 78 . | 1 | 1922–1922 |
Guerin v. Kraner
green
1 sentence1921Guerin v. Kraner, supra; Over v. Shannon, supra. Judgment reversed, with instructions to sustain appellant’s motion for a new trial and for further proceedings not inconsistent herewith. | 1 | 1921–1921 |
Jackson v. Weaver
neutral
1 sentence1921Cole v. Lafontaine (1882), 84 Ind. 446 ; Jackson v. Weaver (1884), 98 Ind. 307 . | 1 | 1921–1921 |
Scherer v. Ingerman
green
2 sentences1917Cole, Admr., v. Lafontaine (1882), 84 Ind. 446, 449 ; Scherer v. Ingerman, Admr. (1887), 110 Ind. 428, 437 , 11 N. E. 8 , 12 N. E. 304 ; O’Haleran v. O’Haleran (1888), 115 Ind. 493, 494 , 17 N. E. 917 . 1917Cole, Admr., v. Lafontaine (1882), 84 Ind. 446, 449 ; Scherer v. Ingerman, Admr. (1887), 110 Ind. 428, 437 , 11 N. E. 8 , 12 N. E. 304 ; O’Haleran v. O’Haleran (1888), 115 Ind. 493, 494 , 17 N. E. 917 . | 1 | 1917–1917 |
O'Haleran v. O'Haleran
neutral
2 sentences1917Cole, Admr., v. Lafontaine (1882), 84 Ind. 446, 449 ; Scherer v. Ingerman, Admr. (1887), 110 Ind. 428, 437 , 11 N. E. 8 , 12 N. E. 304 ; O’Haleran v. O’Haleran (1888), 115 Ind. 493, 494 , 17 N. E. 917 . 1917Cole, Admr., v. Lafontaine (1882), 84 Ind. 446, 449 ; Scherer v. Ingerman, Admr. (1887), 110 Ind. 428, 437 , 11 N. E. 8 , 12 N. E. 304 ; O’Haleran v. O’Haleran (1888), 115 Ind. 493, 494 , 17 N. E. 917 . | 1 | 1917–1917 |
Hurley v. McIver
green
2 sentences1912Langley v. Mayhew, supra; Hurley v. McIver (1889), 119 Ind. 53, 54 , 21 N. E. 325 ; Shipman v. Keys (1891), 127 Ind. 353, 356 , 26 N. E. 896 ; Shafer v. Shafer (1892), 129 Ind. 394, 395 , 28 N. E. 867 ; Boord v. Boord (1904), 163 Ind. 307, 309 , 71 N. E. 891 ; Bowman v. Olrich (1905), 165 Ind. 478, 482 , 75 N. E. 820 ; Young v. Biehl (1906), 166 Ind. 357, 359 , 77 N. E. 406 ; Snodgrass v. Meeks (1895), 12 Ind. App. 70, 73 , 38 N. E. 833 ; Whetsel v. Louden (1900), 25 Ind. App. 257, 261 , 57 N. E. 952 . 1912Langley v. Mayhew, supra; Hurley v. McIver (1889), 119 Ind. 53, 54 , 21 N. E. 325 ; Shipman v. Keys (1891), 127 Ind. 353, 356 , 26 N. E. 896 ; Shafer v. Shafer (1892), 129 Ind. 394, 395 , 28 N. E. 867 ; Boord v. Boord (1904), 163 Ind. 307, 309 , 71 N. E. 891 ; Bowman v. Olrich (1905), 165 Ind. 478, 482 , 75 N. E. 820 ; Young v. Biehl (1906), 166 Ind. 357, 359 , 77 N. E. 406 ; Snodgrass v. Meeks (1895), 12 Ind. App. 70, 73 , 38 N. E. 833 ; Whetsel v. Louden (1900), 25 Ind. App. 257, 261 , 57 N. E. 952 . | 1 | 1912–1912 |
Shafer v. Shafer
green
2 sentences1912Langley v. Mayhew, supra; Hurley v. McIver (1889), 119 Ind. 53, 54 , 21 N. E. 325 ; Shipman v. Keys (1891), 127 Ind. 353, 356 , 26 N. E. 896 ; Shafer v. Shafer (1892), 129 Ind. 394, 395 , 28 N. E. 867 ; Boord v. Boord (1904), 163 Ind. 307, 309 , 71 N. E. 891 ; Bowman v. Olrich (1905), 165 Ind. 478, 482 , 75 N. E. 820 ; Young v. Biehl (1906), 166 Ind. 357, 359 , 77 N. E. 406 ; Snodgrass v. Meeks (1895), 12 Ind. App. 70, 73 , 38 N. E. 833 ; Whetsel v. Louden (1900), 25 Ind. App. 257, 261 , 57 N. E. 952 . 1912Langley v. Mayhew, supra; Hurley v. McIver (1889), 119 Ind. 53, 54 , 21 N. E. 325 ; Shipman v. Keys (1891), 127 Ind. 353, 356 , 26 N. E. 896 ; Shafer v. Shafer (1892), 129 Ind. 394, 395 , 28 N. E. 867 ; Boord v. Boord (1904), 163 Ind. 307, 309 , 71 N. E. 891 ; Bowman v. Olrich (1905), 165 Ind. 478, 482 , 75 N. E. 820 ; Young v. Biehl (1906), 166 Ind. 357, 359 , 77 N. E. 406 ; Snodgrass v. Meeks (1895), 12 Ind. App. 70, 73 , 38 N. E. 833 ; Whetsel v. Louden (1900), 25 Ind. App. 257, 261 , 57 N. E. 952 . | 1 | 1912–1912 |
Shipman v. Keys
neutral
2 sentences1912Langley v. Mayhew, supra; Hurley v. McIver (1889), 119 Ind. 53, 54 , 21 N. E. 325 ; Shipman v. Keys (1891), 127 Ind. 353, 356 , 26 N. E. 896 ; Shafer v. Shafer (1892), 129 Ind. 394, 395 , 28 N. E. 867 ; Boord v. Boord (1904), 163 Ind. 307, 309 , 71 N. E. 891 ; Bowman v. Olrich (1905), 165 Ind. 478, 482 , 75 N. E. 820 ; Young v. Biehl (1906), 166 Ind. 357, 359 , 77 N. E. 406 ; Snodgrass v. Meeks (1895), 12 Ind. App. 70, 73 , 38 N. E. 833 ; Whetsel v. Louden (1900), 25 Ind. App. 257, 261 , 57 N. E. 952 . 1912Langley v. Mayhew, supra; Hurley v. McIver (1889), 119 Ind. 53, 54 , 21 N. E. 325 ; Shipman v. Keys (1891), 127 Ind. 353, 356 , 26 N. E. 896 ; Shafer v. Shafer (1892), 129 Ind. 394, 395 , 28 N. E. 867 ; Boord v. Boord (1904), 163 Ind. 307, 309 , 71 N. E. 891 ; Bowman v. Olrich (1905), 165 Ind. 478, 482 , 75 N. E. 820 ; Young v. Biehl (1906), 166 Ind. 357, 359 , 77 N. E. 406 ; Snodgrass v. Meeks (1895), 12 Ind. App. 70, 73 , 38 N. E. 833 ; Whetsel v. Louden (1900), 25 Ind. App. 257, 261 , 57 N. E. 952 . | 1 | 1912–1912 |
Boord v. Boord
neutral
2 sentences1912Langley v. Mayhew, supra; Hurley v. McIver (1889), 119 Ind. 53, 54 , 21 N. E. 325 ; Shipman v. Keys (1891), 127 Ind. 353, 356 , 26 N. E. 896 ; Shafer v. Shafer (1892), 129 Ind. 394, 395 , 28 N. E. 867 ; Boord v. Boord (1904), 163 Ind. 307, 309 , 71 N. E. 891 ; Bowman v. Olrich (1905), 165 Ind. 478, 482 , 75 N. E. 820 ; Young v. Biehl (1906), 166 Ind. 357, 359 , 77 N. E. 406 ; Snodgrass v. Meeks (1895), 12 Ind. App. 70, 73 , 38 N. E. 833 ; Whetsel v. Louden (1900), 25 Ind. App. 257, 261 , 57 N. E. 952 . 1912Langley v. Mayhew, supra; Hurley v. McIver (1889), 119 Ind. 53, 54 , 21 N. E. 325 ; Shipman v. Keys (1891), 127 Ind. 353, 356 , 26 N. E. 896 ; Shafer v. Shafer (1892), 129 Ind. 394, 395 , 28 N. E. 867 ; Boord v. Boord (1904), 163 Ind. 307, 309 , 71 N. E. 891 ; Bowman v. Olrich (1905), 165 Ind. 478, 482 , 75 N. E. 820 ; Young v. Biehl (1906), 166 Ind. 357, 359 , 77 N. E. 406 ; Snodgrass v. Meeks (1895), 12 Ind. App. 70, 73 , 38 N. E. 833 ; Whetsel v. Louden (1900), 25 Ind. App. 257, 261 , 57 N. E. 952 . | 1 | 1912–1912 |
Bowman v. Olrick
green
2 sentences1912Langley v. Mayhew, supra; Hurley v. McIver (1889), 119 Ind. 53, 54 , 21 N. E. 325 ; Shipman v. Keys (1891), 127 Ind. 353, 356 , 26 N. E. 896 ; Shafer v. Shafer (1892), 129 Ind. 394, 395 , 28 N. E. 867 ; Boord v. Boord (1904), 163 Ind. 307, 309 , 71 N. E. 891 ; Bowman v. Olrich (1905), 165 Ind. 478, 482 , 75 N. E. 820 ; Young v. Biehl (1906), 166 Ind. 357, 359 , 77 N. E. 406 ; Snodgrass v. Meeks (1895), 12 Ind. App. 70, 73 , 38 N. E. 833 ; Whetsel v. Louden (1900), 25 Ind. App. 257, 261 , 57 N. E. 952 . 1912Langley v. Mayhew, supra; Hurley v. McIver (1889), 119 Ind. 53, 54 , 21 N. E. 325 ; Shipman v. Keys (1891), 127 Ind. 353, 356 , 26 N. E. 896 ; Shafer v. Shafer (1892), 129 Ind. 394, 395 , 28 N. E. 867 ; Boord v. Boord (1904), 163 Ind. 307, 309 , 71 N. E. 891 ; Bowman v. Olrich (1905), 165 Ind. 478, 482 , 75 N. E. 820 ; Young v. Biehl (1906), 166 Ind. 357, 359 , 77 N. E. 406 ; Snodgrass v. Meeks (1895), 12 Ind. App. 70, 73 , 38 N. E. 833 ; Whetsel v. Louden (1900), 25 Ind. App. 257, 261 , 57 N. E. 952 . | 1 | 1912–1912 |
Young v. Biehl
green
2 sentences1912Langley v. Mayhew, supra; Hurley v. McIver (1889), 119 Ind. 53, 54 , 21 N. E. 325 ; Shipman v. Keys (1891), 127 Ind. 353, 356 , 26 N. E. 896 ; Shafer v. Shafer (1892), 129 Ind. 394, 395 , 28 N. E. 867 ; Boord v. Boord (1904), 163 Ind. 307, 309 , 71 N. E. 891 ; Bowman v. Olrich (1905), 165 Ind. 478, 482 , 75 N. E. 820 ; Young v. Biehl (1906), 166 Ind. 357, 359 , 77 N. E. 406 ; Snodgrass v. Meeks (1895), 12 Ind. App. 70, 73 , 38 N. E. 833 ; Whetsel v. Louden (1900), 25 Ind. App. 257, 261 , 57 N. E. 952 . 1912Langley v. Mayhew, supra; Hurley v. McIver (1889), 119 Ind. 53, 54 , 21 N. E. 325 ; Shipman v. Keys (1891), 127 Ind. 353, 356 , 26 N. E. 896 ; Shafer v. Shafer (1892), 129 Ind. 394, 395 , 28 N. E. 867 ; Boord v. Boord (1904), 163 Ind. 307, 309 , 71 N. E. 891 ; Bowman v. Olrich (1905), 165 Ind. 478, 482 , 75 N. E. 820 ; Young v. Biehl (1906), 166 Ind. 357, 359 , 77 N. E. 406 ; Snodgrass v. Meeks (1895), 12 Ind. App. 70, 73 , 38 N. E. 833 ; Whetsel v. Louden (1900), 25 Ind. App. 257, 261 , 57 N. E. 952 . | 1 | 1912–1912 |
Snodgrass v. Meeks
green
2 sentences1912Langley v. Mayhew, supra; Hurley v. McIver (1889), 119 Ind. 53, 54 , 21 N. E. 325 ; Shipman v. Keys (1891), 127 Ind. 353, 356 , 26 N. E. 896 ; Shafer v. Shafer (1892), 129 Ind. 394, 395 , 28 N. E. 867 ; Boord v. Boord (1904), 163 Ind. 307, 309 , 71 N. E. 891 ; Bowman v. Olrich (1905), 165 Ind. 478, 482 , 75 N. E. 820 ; Young v. Biehl (1906), 166 Ind. 357, 359 , 77 N. E. 406 ; Snodgrass v. Meeks (1895), 12 Ind. App. 70, 73 , 38 N. E. 833 ; Whetsel v. Louden (1900), 25 Ind. App. 257, 261 , 57 N. E. 952 . 1912Langley v. Mayhew, supra; Hurley v. McIver (1889), 119 Ind. 53, 54 , 21 N. E. 325 ; Shipman v. Keys (1891), 127 Ind. 353, 356 , 26 N. E. 896 ; Shafer v. Shafer (1892), 129 Ind. 394, 395 , 28 N. E. 867 ; Boord v. Boord (1904), 163 Ind. 307, 309 , 71 N. E. 891 ; Bowman v. Olrich (1905), 165 Ind. 478, 482 , 75 N. E. 820 ; Young v. Biehl (1906), 166 Ind. 357, 359 , 77 N. E. 406 ; Snodgrass v. Meeks (1895), 12 Ind. App. 70, 73 , 38 N. E. 833 ; Whetsel v. Louden (1900), 25 Ind. App. 257, 261 , 57 N. E. 952 . | 1 | 1912–1912 |
Whetsell v. Louden
neutral
2 sentences1912Langley v. Mayhew, supra; Hurley v. McIver (1889), 119 Ind. 53, 54 , 21 N. E. 325 ; Shipman v. Keys (1891), 127 Ind. 353, 356 , 26 N. E. 896 ; Shafer v. Shafer (1892), 129 Ind. 394, 395 , 28 N. E. 867 ; Boord v. Boord (1904), 163 Ind. 307, 309 , 71 N. E. 891 ; Bowman v. Olrich (1905), 165 Ind. 478, 482 , 75 N. E. 820 ; Young v. Biehl (1906), 166 Ind. 357, 359 , 77 N. E. 406 ; Snodgrass v. Meeks (1895), 12 Ind. App. 70, 73 , 38 N. E. 833 ; Whetsel v. Louden (1900), 25 Ind. App. 257, 261 , 57 N. E. 952 . 1912Langley v. Mayhew, supra; Hurley v. McIver (1889), 119 Ind. 53, 54 , 21 N. E. 325 ; Shipman v. Keys (1891), 127 Ind. 353, 356 , 26 N. E. 896 ; Shafer v. Shafer (1892), 129 Ind. 394, 395 , 28 N. E. 867 ; Boord v. Boord (1904), 163 Ind. 307, 309 , 71 N. E. 891 ; Bowman v. Olrich (1905), 165 Ind. 478, 482 , 75 N. E. 820 ; Young v. Biehl (1906), 166 Ind. 357, 359 , 77 N. E. 406 ; Snodgrass v. Meeks (1895), 12 Ind. App. 70, 73 , 38 N. E. 833 ; Whetsel v. Louden (1900), 25 Ind. App. 257, 261 , 57 N. E. 952 . | 1 | 1912–1912 |
Ray v. McGinnis
neutral
1 sentence1909Ray v. McGinnis (1882), 81 Ind. 451 . | 1 | 1909–1909 |
Gross v. Board of Commissioners
green
1 sentence1909Gross v. Board,, etc. (1902), 158 Ind. 531 , 58 L. | 1 | 1909–1909 |
| Commissioners of Leavenworth County v. Keller green | 1 | 1900–1900 |
Abernathy v. . Phifer
neutral
1 sentence1900Commissioners, etc., v. Keller, 6 Kan. 510 ; Board, etc., v. Catlett, 86 Va. 158 ; Abernathy v. Phifer, 84 N. C. 711 . | 1 | 1900–1900 |
| Board of Supervisors v. Catlett's Ex'ors neutral | 1 | 1900–1900 |
Myers v. Gibson
green
1 sentence1900J., said: “It is settled law that a board of commissioners in this State Has no powers, except such as are expressly given by statute, and such as are necessary to the exercise of the powers expressly given; and the powers so given are limited and must be exercised in the manner provided by statute.” Citing, Myers v. Gibson, 147 Ind. 452 ; Board, etc., v. Pollard, 17 Ind. App. 470 . | 1 | 1900–1900 |
| Board of Commissioners v. Pollard neutral | 1 | 1900–1900 |
| Blankenbaker v. Bank of Commerce green | 1 | 1891–1891 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.