Bayless v. Jones
Headnotes
Summary
Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
Gavin, J.
In order to save any question by a motion in arrest of judgment, it must be made before the judgment is rendered. Potter v. McCormack, 127 Ind. 489 ; Colchen v. Ninde, 120 Ind. 88 ; Hansher v. Hanshew, 94 Ind. 208 ; Brownlee, Admr., v. Hare, 64 Ind. 311 ; Hilligoss v. Pittsburgh, etc., R. R. Co., 40 Ind. 112 ; Smith v. Dodds, 35 Ind. 452 .
The motion in this case was, therefore, filed too late. Even had it been filed at the proper time, it would have availed nothing, because whatever defect there may have been in the complaint was cured by the verdict. Hasselman Printing Co. v. Fry, 9 Ind. App. 393 ; Duffy v. Carman, 3 Ind. App. 207 ; Citizens’ St. R. W. Co. v. Willoeby, 134 Ind. 563 , and cases there cited.
A motion in arrest, based upon defects in the complaint, reaches such only as are not cured by the verdict or finding. Jones v. Ahrens, 116 Ind. 490 ; Sims v. Dame, 113 Ind. 127 ; Balliett v. Humphreys, 78 Ind. 388 .
Judgment affirmed.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 3 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.