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.
6 Indiana opinions name it 2 courts 1881–2012 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 |
|---|---|---|
Bellew v. Byersgreen2 sentences2012See Bellew v. Byers, 272 Ind. 37, 38 , 396 N.E.2d 335, 336 (1979) (addressing a minor’s compromise claim in which the parent and natural guardian was paid an amount for the injuries to her three children in return for a release), abrogated on other grounds by Huffman v. Monroe Cnty. 2012See Bellew v. Byers, 272 Ind. 37, 38 , 396 N.E.2d 335, 336 (1979) (addressing a minor’s compromise claim in which the parent and natural guardian was paid an amount for the injuries to her three children in return for a release), abrogated on other grounds by Huffman v. Monroe Cnty. | 2 | 2 |
Stimpson v. Poolegreen2 sentences1962It stands on the same footing as would a compromise between the parties in the country. ‘Money paid, which is to be in full for an unliquidated or a disputed claim, is taken in discharge of it, and constitutes a full defence against any further assertion of the claim.’ Stimpson v. Poole, 141 Mass. 502, 505 [ 6 N. E. 705 ]. 1962It stands on the same footing as would a compromise between the parties in the country. ‘Money paid, which is to be in full for an unliquidated or a disputed claim, is taken in discharge of it, and constitutes a full defence against any further assertion of the claim.’ Stimpson v. Poole, 141 Mass. 502, 505 [ 6 N. E. 705 ]. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Indiana. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Jarvis v. Sutton
green
2 sentences1890The rule is too thoroughly settled to be now departed from that “A promise to give something for the compromise of a claim, about which there is merely a dispute and controversy, and for which there is no legal foundation whatever, is not sufficient to sustain a suit at law.” Jarvis v. Sutton, 3 Ind. 289 . 1887In the language of the court in Jarvis v. Sutton, 3 Ind. 289 , “ It is true a compromise of doubtful claims maybe sufficient to found a consideration upon, but in such cases there must be a surrender of some legal benefit which the other party might have retained. * * * A promise to give something for the compromise of a claim, about which there is merely a dispute and controversy, and for which there is no legal foundation whatever, is not sufficient to sustain a suit at law.” In order that a compromise may constitute a sufficient consideration for the enforcement of an executory contract, th | 2 | 1887–1890 |
United States Mortgage Co. v. Henderson
neutral
1 sentence1890United States Mortgage Co. v. Henderson, 111 Ind. 24 , and cases cited; Emery v. Royal, 117 Ind. 299 , and cases cited. | 1 | 1890–1890 |
Emery v. Royal
neutral
1 sentence1890United States Mortgage Co. v. Henderson, 111 Ind. 24 , and cases cited; Emery v. Royal, 117 Ind. 299 , and cases cited. | 1 | 1890–1890 |
Schnell v. Nell
green
1 sentence1881A promise to give something for the compromise of a claim,* for which .there is no legal foundation whatever, is not sufficient to sustain a suit at law.” See, also, Schnell v. Nell, 17 Ind. 29 ; Coy v. Stucker, 31 Ind. 161 ; Spahr v. Hollingshead, 8 Blackf. 415 . | 1 | 1881–1881 |
Coy v. Stucker
neutral
1 sentence1881A promise to give something for the compromise of a claim,* for which .there is no legal foundation whatever, is not sufficient to sustain a suit at law.” See, also, Schnell v. Nell, 17 Ind. 29 ; Coy v. Stucker, 31 Ind. 161 ; Spahr v. Hollingshead, 8 Blackf. 415 . | 1 | 1881–1881 |
Spahr v. Hollingshead
green
1 sentence1881A promise to give something for the compromise of a claim,* for which .there is no legal foundation whatever, is not sufficient to sustain a suit at law.” See, also, Schnell v. Nell, 17 Ind. 29 ; Coy v. Stucker, 31 Ind. 161 ; Spahr v. Hollingshead, 8 Blackf. 415 . | 1 | 1881–1881 |
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.