63 Ind. App. 465 | Ind. Ct. App. | 1917
This was an action by appellee against appellant to recover a sum of money alleged to have been allowed by appellee in violation of law. There was also a cross-complaint filed by appellant in which it sought to recover a sum of money alleged to be due for the printing of supplies for appellee for other years. This went out on demurrer. Upon a trial had there was judgment for appellee for $95 and $10 attorney fees. To reverse this judgment appellant prosecutes this appeal.
The complaint alleges substantially that appellant is a printing company, and that in the year 1910 appellee con
A demurrer to the complaint for insufficient facts, accompanied by a memorandum specifying that no demand was made, was overruled and excepted to. This action of the trial court is the first error assigned.
In this Case the cross-complaint was bad in many respects. No harm could possibly come to appellant on account of the ruling complained of. Under such circumstances this court will look beyond the mere form of the demurrer to uphold the trial court.
An examination of the instructions referred to clearly show they are not applicable to the theory of the complaint, which, as we have said, is clearly an action under the statute to recover illegal payments made by the board of commissioners.
Note.—Reported in 114 N. E. 703. See under (1) 30 Cyc 1323; (3) 11 Cyc 599. Effect of allowance or rejection by county of claim presented against it, 55 Am. St. 203.