fourth assignment error (Indiana) · Go Syfert
← Indiana issues

fourth assignment error in Indiana

7 Indiana opinions name it 2 courts 1873–1940 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.

Followed or applied (0)

CaseFollowedCited
No positive-treatment citations attached to this issue in Indiana.

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Indiana. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (11)

CaseCitedYears
Smith v. James green
ind · 1892
2 sentences

1940Smith v. James (1891), 131 Ind. 131 , 30 N. E. 902 . *362 The fourth assignment of error to the effect that the judgment and decision of the court is contrary to law is not sufficient either as a separate assignment of error or as a ground for a new trial.

1940Smith v. James (1891), 131 Ind. 131 , 30 N. E. 902 . *362 The fourth assignment of error to the effect that the judgment and decision of the court is contrary to law is not sufficient either as a separate assignment of error or as a ground for a new trial.

11940–1940
Haynes v. Switzer Real Estate Corp. green
indctapp · 1935
2 sentences

1937Haynes v. Switzer Real Estate Corp. (1935), 100 Ind. App. 410 , 196 N. E. 133 ; McCord, et al. v. Chief Anderson Assn.

1937Haynes v. Switzer Real Estate Corp. (1935), 100 Ind. App. 410 , 196 N. E. 133 ; McCord, et al. v. Chief Anderson Assn.

11937–1937
Borders v. Williams green
ind · 1900
2 sentences

1925Borders v. Williams (1900), 155 Ind. 36 , 57 N. E. 527 . *547 *546 The fourth assignment of error is, that the court *547 erred in its conclusion of law No. 7, in holding that five ballots were illegal and void and should not be counted, for the reason that they were absent •voters’ ballots and did not have the impression of the official seal of the clerk of the Blackford Circuit Court.

1925Borders v. Williams (1900), 155 Ind. 36 , 57 N. E. 527 . *547 *546 The fourth assignment of error is, that the court *547 erred in its conclusion of law No. 7, in holding that five ballots were illegal and void and should not be counted, for the reason that they were absent •voters’ ballots and did not have the impression of the official seal of the clerk of the Blackford Circuit Court.

11925–1925
Anson v. Connett green
ind · 1918
1 sentence

1924Bass v. State (1918), 188 Ind. 21 , 120 N. E. 657 . *337 *336 By his proposition addressed to the fourth assignment of error, appellant raises the question of the constitutionality of the act, in violation of Art. 4, §19, of *337 the Constitution of Indiana, upon which the affidavit which charges the crime is based, and makes the point, that the act has reference to the possession and use of stills for the manufacture of intoxicating liquor, but that such use is not specifically mentioned in the title of the act; and that stills may be for other purposes than distilling intoxicating liquor; fr

11924–1924
Bass v. State green
ind · 1918
1 sentence

1924Bass v. State (1918), 188 Ind. 21 , 120 N. E. 657 . *337 *336 By his proposition addressed to the fourth assignment of error, appellant raises the question of the constitutionality of the act, in violation of Art. 4, §19, of *337 the Constitution of Indiana, upon which the affidavit which charges the crime is based, and makes the point, that the act has reference to the possession and use of stills for the manufacture of intoxicating liquor, but that such use is not specifically mentioned in the title of the act; and that stills may be for other purposes than distilling intoxicating liquor; fr

11924–1924
Farman v. Chamberlain neutral
ind · 1881
1 sentence

1897It is pleaded in bar of the action and as it does not answer the entire complaint, the demurrer should have been sustained, Farman v. Chamberlain, supra. The fourth assignment of error is the sustaining of the demurrer to the fourth paragraph of reply to the third paragraph of answer of appellee.

11897–1897
New Albany & Salem Railroad v. O'Daily green
ind · 1859
1 sentence

1879See the following cases: Cubberly v. Wine, 13 Ind. 353 ; Wainscott v. Silvers, 13 Ind. 497 ; Piel v. Brayer, 30 Ind. 332 ; Knarr v. Conaway, 42 Ind. 260 .

11879–1879
Doron v. Cosby neutral
ind · 1859
1 sentence

1879See the following cases: Cubberly v. Wine, 13 Ind. 353 ; Wainscott v. Silvers, 13 Ind. 497 ; Piel v. Brayer, 30 Ind. 332 ; Knarr v. Conaway, 42 Ind. 260 .

11879–1879
Piel v. Brayer neutral
ind · 1868
1 sentence

1879See the following cases: Cubberly v. Wine, 13 Ind. 353 ; Wainscott v. Silvers, 13 Ind. 497 ; Piel v. Brayer, 30 Ind. 332 ; Knarr v. Conaway, 42 Ind. 260 .

11879–1879
Knarr v. Conaway green
ind · 1873
1 sentence

1879See the following cases: Cubberly v. Wine, 13 Ind. 353 ; Wainscott v. Silvers, 13 Ind. 497 ; Piel v. Brayer, 30 Ind. 332 ; Knarr v. Conaway, 42 Ind. 260 .

11879–1879
Wesley v. Milford neutral
ind · 1872
1 sentence

1873In Wesley v. Milford supra, it was held, that on appeal from the superior court, it could not be assigned for error here, as it could on appeal from the circuit of common pleas court, that the complaint did not contain facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action; but it was further held, that the question as to the sufficiency of the complaint might be presented in the general term, although it was not presented or raised in any way in the special term, and that such question might be raised in the general term by an assignment of error that the complaint did not contain facts sufficient

11873–1873

Where else courts name it

OH 586 (1943–2026) TX 29 (1888–2015) OK 29 (1905–1988) TN 24 (1927–1976) OR 23 (1933–2025) PA 19 (1896–1992) VA 19 (1901–2026) LA 18 (1928–2021) NE 16 (1886–2014) NC 8 (1895–2009) WA 7 (1962–2019) AL 7 (1853–1956) IN 7 (1873–1940) WV 6 (1893–2020) FL 5 (1892–1939) MA 5 (1928–1963) MS 4 (1955–1997) ID 3 (1910–1957) AZ 3 (1925–1966) CA 3 (1880–1960) MO 2 (1914–1966) WI 2 (1899–1973) IL 2 (1911–1949) KS 2 (1882–1897) PR 2 (1928–1956)

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.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check