Court Opinion

ID: 9532084
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 04:17:58.36109+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:28:40.432505
License: Public Domain

Dissent
Jackson, C. J.
As stated, this case comes here on petition to transfer from the Appellate Court.
These actions originated in the Gibson Circuit Court where appellants instituted actions against the appellee for loss of services and for injuries resulting from a collision by appellee’s auto with a divider strip in the highway. Appellant, Katherine Miller, a guest in appellee’s automobile was severely injured. The trial court found for and rendered judgment in favor of appellee.
On appeal the Appellate Court affirmed the decision of the lower.court. Appellant alleged six grounds for transfer.
In my opinion none of the grounds stated are sufficient to require or even permit transfer. These actions grow out of a guest case injury; before appellant, Katherine Miller, is entitled to recover she must allege and prove wanton and wilful negligence on the part of the appellee. That burden she must- sustain. The trial court found in favor of appellee after hearing all the evidence. That determination by the trial court is conclusive as we do not on appeal weigh conflicting evidence. We do not on appeal search the record to reverse. It is fundamental on appeal that if there is any evidence in the record to sustain the judgment on the trial court, the judgment must be affirmed, this the Appellate Court did after full consideration of the matter on appeal.
The questions raised in the petition to transfer, *570especially the instructions relative to “pure accident”, are not germane to the issues here, and on the state of the record before us, if they are in fact erroneous, the error is harmless.
Transfer should be denied.
Note. — Reported in 207 N. E. 2d 633.