Bush v. McBride
Cases that cite this one
11 later published cases cite this decision.
- City of Huntingburg v. State Ex Rel. Olinger (Ind. Ct. App. 1924)
- Wood v. City of Detroit (Mich. 1915)
- Peabody-Alwert Coal Co. v. Yandell (Ind. 1913)
- Jeffersonville Manufacturing Co. v. Holden (Ind. 1913)
- Stoll v. Pacific Coast S. S. Co. (District Court, W.D. Washington 1913)
- Indiana Union Traction Co. v. Pring (Ind. Ct. App. 1911)
- Poli v. Numa Block Coal Co. (Iowa 1910)
- Fowler v. Newsom (Ind. 1909)
- Welsh v. Barber Asphalt Paving Co. (9th Cir. 1909)
- Starkey v. Starkey (Ind. 1906)
- Denkewalter v. Wilson (Ind. Ct. App. 1906)
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
Appellee brought this action to recover judgment on a promissory note executed by appellant William H. Bush, and to foreclose a mortgage on real estate executed by Bush and wife to secure said promissory note. Appellant Nathan Miller who had possession of a part of the real estate described in said mortgage as receiver, and who was sued by permission of the court in which he was appointed, was made a defendant to said action. Bush and wife and said receiver each filed a demurrer for want of facts to the complaint, which was overruled. Said appellants refusing
Appellants Bush and wife, and Miller, receiver, jointly assign for error “that the court erred in overruling the demurrer to the complaint.”
It is insisted by said appellants that the complaint was not sufficient to entitle appellee to a foreclosure of said mortgage. It is clear, however, that the allegations of the complaint were'sufficient to entitle appellee to recover judgment against William IT. Bush on the note sued upon. As said joint assignment of errors is not good as to all the appellants joining therein, it is not available. Ewbank’s Manual, §138, and cases cited; Green v. Heaston, 154 Ind. 127, 130, and cases cited; Doty v. Patterson, 155 Ind. 60, 61; Sheeks v. State, ex rel., 156 Ind. 508, 509, and cases cited; M. A. Sweeney Co. v. Fry, 151 Ind. 178, 181.
Finding no available error in the record, the judgment is affirmed.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.