Indiana State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis) 1841-1853, 1846-06-04
WEDNESDAY MN OF

WEDNESDAY, Nay 81.
Dunn and Watts v. Hail. Appeal from the Dearborn
c. C. Opinion by PERKINS, J.
A. brought action the against B. and c. The
summons served b. and returned not ound as to
C. B. appeared and plead separately the general ISSUE
the continued. In vacation
served C requiring him appear at the next term
of the Circuit Court A. said action. At the
term TO which the cause continued and the writ return
able pint final judgment obtained against the deen-
dants This last writ having made reference to the Joint
action in which he implicated with A. be regarded
another and could be notice of the joint
In actions for unqudated damages the jury may agree
that each juror should place upon ticket the
willing to in damages and the
added together and divided by twelve and the quoen be
submitted as medium upon which to found verdict
But this method cannot be adopted pursuant 10
RYMAN and SPooNER for defendants
Opinion by PERKINS, ].
In actions cOnracu noe prosequ cannot be entered
as 10 defendant and the suit gan the Others
until after such defendant shall have pleading and
plead matter going to his personal discharge Reversed
LocKPoRT for plain if; BATELL for defendant.
cNutt and another Dare Error to the Franklin c. C.
Opinion by DEWEY, J.
An instrument Of writing invalid as contract for want of
mutually between two parties, but whose have been
performed by both parties, is legal evidence in action
between the same parties involving the subject matter of the
instrument.
The defendant in chaucery is legal evidence
against him in suit at law, and if part of his
is read against him. he is entitled to have the whole go
to the jury. Reversed RYMAN for PLAINTIFF HOLLAND for
defendant.
Cor Kirkpatrick. Appeal from the TippccanOe c. c.
Opinion by DEWEY J.
In declaration for malicious prosecution allegation
that the defendant falsely and macousy, and without
any reasonable probable cause charged the plaintiff with
having eloniously stolen defendant
sufficient to show that criminal offence imputed
the plaintiff and that the justice before whom it made,
authorized TO issue against him. Reversed
MACE and CRANE for the plaintiffs GREGORY for the defen
dant.
Condrd and another Docling Error to the Vigo c. C.
Opinion by BLACKBOARD J.
Appeal, that note given in part payment for certain
property which the plaintiff had not at the date of the note
he title to said property should that
plaintiff warranted the title knew that he had
the property; where there such warranty fraud
the Of title in the seller ground of action for the
purchaser affirmed THOMPSON and BARBOUR for plaintiffs
GRIswOLD and USHER for defendants.
ShankIiH v. Cooper. Error to the VanderbuTgh C. c.
Opinion by BLACKBOARD, ].
special plea that states that endorsement Of note
sideration is in substance valid
An endorsement is a which must governed by
the of the place where the payable without re-
gard the place where the endorsement actually made
The protest and certificate Of notary public admissible
evidence show the diligence the plaintiff has used 10 make
the defendant liable.
The statute enacts that no judgment in any civil action
SHALL be reversed after verdict where the merits appear
be fully decided Affirmed BAKER for the plaintiff; Lock-
II sRr for the defendant.
Duke v. Oglesby. Error to the Vigo C. c. affirmed
Elefrefs B0tOS0n. Error o the Adams c c. Affirmed
Cole v. Duff Appeal TO the Miami c. c. Affirmed
ArQuoid v. McQuoid Appeal to the Union c. c. Af-
frmed.