TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Taylor v. Dougan

Taylor v. Dougan, Administrator

Taylor v. Dougan, 129 N.E. 260 (Ind. Ct. App. 1920)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Indiana Court of Appeals · State Appellate Courts
Decided
December 22, 1920
Docket
No. 10,631
Judges
Nichols
Citations
129 N.E. 26074 Ind. App. 5221920 Ind. App. LEXIS 273
Disposition
Affirmed.
Headnotes
Appeal. — Presentation in Lower Court. — Objections, Motions and Exceptions. — Evidence.—Where there was no objection to evidence, nor any motion to strike it out, nor any exception saved, the question of admissibility of the evidence will not be considered on appeal.
Summary
From Putnam Circuit Court; James P. Hughes, Judge. Exceptions by Jessie M. Taylor to the final report of Zimri E. Dougan, as administrator of the estate of Francis M. Cravens, deceased. From a judgment overruling the exceptions, said Taylor appeals.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Nichols

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

Nichols, J.

This appeal is from a judgment of the trial court overruling appellant’s exceptions to the final report of appellee as administrator of the estate of Francis M. Craven, deceased, who was the grandfather of appellant. By said report, appellant was not permitted to participate in the distribution because of an advancement which, as appeared by the report, had been made to her father, then deceased, who was the son of appellee’s decedent. In a partition proceeding theretofore between the heirs of said Francis M. Craven, deceased, Ruth F. Craven, .the widow of said deceased, had testified as a witness. The widow having died, testimony in the former suit, transcribed by the shorthand reporter, was read in evidence in the present case. It does not appear that there was any objection to it or any motion to strike it out, or any exception saved. Unless such questions are first raised in the trial court, they will not be considered on appeal: 1 Ind. Digest, Appeal, §204. With this evidence before the court, there was ample evidence to sustain the decision of the court, and it was not contrary to law. It does not appear that there was any objection to any of the evidence. As the only questions presented in the motion for a new trial, except as above considered, pertain to the admissibility of evidence, there is no available error. The judgment is affirmed.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 0 cases

No case in this database cites this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list