History
  • No items yet
midpage
Ralston v. Radcliff
34 Ind. 513
Ind.
1870
Check Treatment
Downey, J.

Radcliff filed a claim before the commissioners of DeKalb county, which was allowed. Ralston, on affidavit and bond filed, appealed to the circuit court, from the order of allowance. In the circuit court the case appears to have been wrongly docketed as Samuel W. Ralston v. John F. Radcliff A bill of exceptions, signed by the judge of the circuit court, shows that when the case was. called for trial in that court, ā€œ Radcliff offered no evidence whatever, whereupon the said Ralston, by his attorney,.announced that they would offer no evidence, and thereupon the court dismissed. *514the appeal, on the ground that the. appellant had the burden of proof thrown upon him.ā€ Ralston excepted, and appealed to this court.

y. L. Worden, y. Morris, and W. H. Withers, for appellant.

This ruling was wrong. The case should have been dockected in the circuit court as Radcliff v. Ralston, should have been tried de novo, and if no evidence was offered, should have been decided on the merits for Ralston, the appellant.

The judgment is reversed, with costs, and the cause remanded. '

Worden, J., having been concerned as counsel in the cause, was absent.

Case Details

Case Name: Ralston v. Radcliff
Court Name: Indiana Supreme Court
Date Published: Nov 15, 1870
Citation: 34 Ind. 513
Court Abbreviation: Ind.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.