Case ID: ind_119/html/0026-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Elliott, C. J. —", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

No. 13,708.
    Thickstun v. The Baltimore and Ohio Railroad Company.
    New Trial. — Amount of Recovery. — Supreme Cov/i't. — Practice.—No question as to the amount of the recovery is presented to the Supreme Court unless it is assigned as a cause for a new trial.
    From the Clark Circuit Court.
    
      W. B. Goodwin, for appellant.
    
      A. Dowling, for appellee.
   Elliott, C. J. —

The appellant recovered judgment for twenty-five dollars in the court below, and moved for a new trial, assigning as causes that the finding is contrary to law, and that it is not sustained by sufficient evidence. Under the settled rule, no question as to the amount of the recovery is presented by this motion for a new trial. Hyatt v. Mat- tingly, 68 Ind. 271; Langohr v. Smith, 81 Ind. 495; McElhoes v. Dale, 81 Ind. 67; Millikan v. Patterson, 91 Ind. 515; Fort Wayne, etc., R. W. Co. v. Beyerle, 110 Ind. 100. As the sole contention is that, the recovery was not for a sum to which the appellant claims he was entitled, we must affirm the judgment, because the question is not presented as the law requires.

Filed May 10, 1889.

Judgment affirmed.