Case ID: ind_73/html/0482-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Howk, C. J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

No. 7729.
    Hendricks v. The State, ex rel. Huff.
    Supreme Court. — Appeal.—Practice.—Notice to Co-Party. — Where one of several defendants appeals to the Supreme Court without giving notice thereof to his co-defendants, as required by section 551 of the code, the appeal will be dismissed.
    From the Grant Circuit Court.
    
      J. Brownlee, H. Brownlee, I. VanDevanter and J. W. Lacey, for appellant.
    
      B. F. Williams, J. F. McDowell and G. L. McDowell, for appellee.
   Howk, C. J.

— In this case, Hiram K. Hendricks alone has appealed to this court from a judgment rendered by the court below against him and one Lewis Foster, and in favor of the appellee’s relator, in a suit on a guardian’s bond. The record and files of the case show that the appellant, Hendricks, has not served notice of his appeal on his co-•defendant, Foster, and filed the proof of such service with '.the clerk of this court, in conformity with the requirements ¡of section 551 of the code, 2 R. S. 1876, p. 239. Upon the ground of the appellant’s failure to comply with the express .provisions of the statute, in respect to such notice, the appellee’s relator has moved the court to dismiss this appeal. For the reason given, the motion must be sustained and the .appeal dismissed accordingly. Reeder v. Maranda, 55 Ind. 239 ; Pierson v. Hart, 64 Ind. 254; and Hammon v. Sexton, 69 Ind. 37.

The appeal is dismissed, at the appellant’s costs.