11 Ind. 242 | Ind. | 1858
Suit upon a replevin-bond. The bond was
All the defendants answered by a general denial of each and every allegation in the complaint.
Judah and Denny answered in a second paragraph, “that all the money collected by said Cooke, which the plaintiff is entitled to percentage on, was collected before the filing of the bond mentioned in plaintiff’s complaint.”
To the answer, there was no reply. We think none was necessary to complete the issue. The suit being upon the bond, went only for rights that accrued under the bond. The introductory matter was not issuable. The paragraph in the answer which alleged that all Cooke’s liability-accrued before the bond was executed, was an argumentative denial that any liability accrued under the bond sued on, and, hence, amounted to nothing more than the general denial. The bond did not, it may be remarked, purport to cover antecedent liability.
The next entry of record is, that the defendants were called and came not, but made default, and thereupon the Court referred the cause to a commissioner to take an account. No judgment upon default was entered.
The next entry states that the plaintiff, by his attorney, and the defendants, by Judah and Denny, their attorneys, came, and also the commissioner, who made his report;
We must regard this case as one tried by the Court, by consent of parties, upon the general denial of the complaint, and in which no motion for a new trial was made, and the evidence is not presented in the record
Per Oivriam.— The judgment is affirmed, with 1 per cent, damages and costs.
See Reno v. Crane, 2 Blackf. 217; Lurton v. Carson, id. 464; Stump v. Fraley, 7 Ind. R. 679; Doe v. Herr, 8 id. 23, 24; Zehnor v. Beard, id. 96; Priest v. Martin, 4 Blackf. 311; The State v. Swarts, 9 Ind. R. 221; McDonald v. Stader, 10 id. 171; Griffin v. Lynch, id. 217; McGregor v. Axe, id. 362; Filson v. Blecker, id. 544.