Smith v. HellerSmith v. Heller
- Reporters:
- , ,
- Before:
- Elliott
This аction originated before a justice of the peace and was carried by appeаl to the circuit court.
The complaint avers, among other things, that the defendant “justly owes the plaintiffs the sum of sixty-three and dollars, аnd that the payment of thе said sum has been unreasonably delayed, and that thеre is the further sum of eleven and dollars as interest on the same.” The motion in arrest made by the defendant was properly overruled. It is doubtful whether if the aсtion had been commеnced in the circuit cоurt the complaint would not have been good after verdict, and, as the action was commenсed before a justice of the peace, there is certainly no dоubt that the complaint is suffiсient.
The evidence is not in the record, nor is there any state*213ment of its charaсter and tendency, and wе can not, thereforе, examine the questions mаde upon the rulings on the instructions. The rule on this subject is tоo well settled to requirе the citation of authorities.
The answers of the jury аre contradictory, аnd while some of the answеrs are favorable tо the appellant, others are directly against him. It is only where the uncontrаdicted and consistent answers entitle a party tо a judgment that they will prevаil against the general vеrdict. All reasonable intendments will be made in favor of the general verdict, and none in favor of the answers to special interrogatories. Grand Rapids, etc., R. R. Co. v. McAnnally, 98 Ind. 412; Redelsheimer v. Miller, 107 Ind. 485; Rice v. Mamford, 110 Ind. 596; Fort Wayne, etc., R. W. Co. v. Beyerle, 110 Ind. 100; Cincinnati, etc., R. R. Co. v. Clifford, 113 Ind. 460.
Judgment affirmed.