Case ID: ind_113/html/0177-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Elliott, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

No. 12,502.
    Racer et al. v. Baker et al.
    
      Practice. — Mode of Conducting Trial. — Admission and Exclusion of Evidence. —Motion for New Trial. — In order to present questions arising on the mode of conducting the trial, and in admitting and excluding evidence, a motion for a new trial must be filed.
    From the Blackford Circuit Court.
    
      Filed Dec. 1, 1887;
    petition for a rehearing overruled Jan. 26, 1888.
    
    
      R. S. Gregory, A. C. Silverburg, W. A. Bonham and J. A. Bonham, for appellants.
    
      W. H. Carroll, E. Pierce, A. Steele and R. T. St. John, for appellees.
   Elliott, J.

The appellees petitioned for the construction of a ditch, and the appellants opposed by a remonstrance. Two questions are here discussed by appellants’ counsel, but these questions are not properly presented for our consideration, as there was no motion for a new trial.

It is settled, that in order to present questions arising on the mode of conducting the trial and in admitting and excluding evidence, a motion for a new trial must be filed in the court below. Neff v. Reed, 98 Ind. 341; Meranda v. Spurlin, 100 Ind. 380; Crume v. Wilson, 104 Ind. 583; Bass v. Elliott, 105 Ind. 517.

The provisions of the civil code apply to all cases where issues are formed and tried, except where the special statute expressly or impliedly otherwise provides. Robertson v. State, ex rel., 109 Ind. 79 (87); Hutchinson v. Trauerman, 112 Ind. 21.

Judgment affirmed.