Buchart v. Burger
Cases that cite this one
12 later published cases cite this decision.
- Hawkins v. State (Ind. 1929)
- Cornell v. Hallett (Ind. 1895)
- Citizens' Street Railway Co. v. Abright (Ind. Ct. App. 1895)
- Wood v. Ohio Falls Car Co. (Ind. 1894)
- Miller v. Blue (Ind. Ct. App. 1894)
- Plotz v. Friend (Ind. Ct. App. 1892)
- Buckner v. Spaulding (Ind. 1891)
- Hormann v. Hartmetz (Ind. 1891)
- City of Plymouth v. Fields (Ind. 1890)
- Rigler v. Rigler (Ind. 1889)
- McCormick Harvesting Machine Co. v. Maas (Ind. 1889)
- McCoy v. State ex rel. Trucks (Ind. 1889)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
The appellee insists that there is no bill of exceptions in the record. On the back of the bill is written : “ Tendered to me for approval and signature, March 15th, 1886.” This is not sufficient. The statute in express terms requires that “the date of the presentation shall be stated in the bill of exceptions.” R. S. 1881, section 629. It has been expressly decided that a statement on the margin or on the back of the bill is not sufficient. Orton v. Tilden, 110 Ind. 131 (139).
Judgment affirmed.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.