From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

INTERNATIONAL SHOE COMPANY v. LACY

Court of Appeals of Indiana
May 21, 1945
116 Ind. App. 78 (Ind. Ct. App. 1945)

Opinion

No. 17,174.

Filed May 21, 1945.

1. APPEAL — Determination — Retention of Jurisdiction for Purpose of Effectuating Mandate. — The Appellate Court retains jurisdiction of a case appealed to it for the purpose of effectuating its mandates. p. 79.

2. APPEAL — Determination — Reversal — Cause in Effect Ordered Remanded with Instructions to Sustain Motion for New Trial. — Where appellant assigned as error the overruling of a motion for a new trial and the Appellate Court, being of the opinion the trial court erred in not sustaining the motion, reversed the judgment, the cause was in effect ordered remanded with instructions to sustain appellant's motion for a new trial and for further proceedings. p. 79.

From the Marion Superior Court; Chester L. Zechiel, Special Judge.

Supplementary Opinion.

For former opinion, see 114 Ind. App. 641.

Owen S. Boling, Newberger, Simon Davis, and Alex Asch, all of Indianapolis, for appellant.

Walter G. Todd and Milton E. Craig, both of Indianapolis, for appellee.


In an opinion filed on March 20, 1944, and reported in 114 Ind. App. 641, 53 N.E.2d 636, the judgment rendered in favor of the appellee Lacy on her cross-complaint was reversed by this Court, but without directions. It has now been made to appear that the trial court, though willing to proceed in accordance with the decision of this Court, has not done so because of its uncertainty as to the full import and effect of our mandate.

This Court retains jurisdiction of the original cause for the purpose of effectuating its mandate. Union Trust Co., 1. etc. v. Curtis (1917), 186 Ind. 516, 116 N.E. 916.

The appellant in the appeal in this case, assigned as error the overruling of its motion for new trial. Being of the opinion that the trial court erred in not sustaining the motion and 2. granting a new trial, the judgment was reversed. Thus the cause was in effect ordered remanded with instructions to sustain appellant's motion for a new trial, and for further proceedings.

The trial court is therefore ordered to proceed accordingly.

NOTE. — Reported in 61 N.E.2d 85.


Summaries of

INTERNATIONAL SHOE COMPANY v. LACY

Court of Appeals of Indiana
May 21, 1945
116 Ind. App. 78 (Ind. Ct. App. 1945)
Case details for

INTERNATIONAL SHOE COMPANY v. LACY

Case Details

Full title:INTERNATIONAL SHOE COMPANY v. LACY

Court:Court of Appeals of Indiana

Date published: May 21, 1945

Citations

116 Ind. App. 78 (Ind. Ct. App. 1945)
61 N.E.2d 85

Citing Cases

Hunter v. Hunter

It is well settled that a court on appeal retains jurisdiction of the original cause for the purpose of…

North v. Newlin

(Emphasis added.) In this regard, it is instructive to note the general rule that "the mere fact that parties…