Графични страници
PDF файл
ePub

Rev. Stat. 1894, $ 7051) provides that, when the busi. unles, besball file his dissent, and that the shares of ness of any person shall be suspended by the action any dissenting stock bolder shall be acquired by the of creditors, the debts owing to employees for labor lessee, the lessee is not required to buy the stock of a to an amount pot exceeding $50 each for work per. member of such corporation who had voted for the formed witbin six months next preceding the seizure lease and afterwards filed a written declaration of dig. of the preperty of such person shall be treated as pre. sent.-BOSTON & M. R. R. V. GRAHAM, Mass., 60 N. E. ferred debts, and shall be first paid in full. Held, that Rep. 403. the statute is not unconstitutional as impairing the | 16. CORPORATIONS - Taxation - Statutory Require. obligations of contracts because it operates only on ment.-Pub. Stat. ch. 13, $$ 38, 40. impose a tax on contracts entered into after its enactment; nor is the every corporation chartered by the commonwealth, statute unconstitutional as devesting vested rights, or organized under the general laws for business or gince the legislature has power to regulate the

profit, having a capital stock divided into shares. priority of statutory liens, among which are chattel The defendant gas company was organized in July, mortgages.-SMALL V. HAMMES, Ind., 60 N. E. Rep. 342.

1896, and in December, 1897, issued $1,000,000 worth of 9. CONTRACTS — Assignment - Breach. - Defendant shares, which were paid for in cash. Held, that the sold bis livery stable to plaintiff and F, as partners, fact that defendant's treasurer did not file a certificate and agreed not to re-engage in the livery business in with the secretary of State that the capital stock had that town while the parties of the second part were been paid in, as required by Pub. Stat. cb. 106, $ 46, engaged in that business on the premises sold. F until December 21, 1899, did not relieve the defendant assigned bis interest in the contract to plaintiff, and from the payment of the tax assessed on May 1, 1898, thereafter defendant started a livery stable. Held, since the corporation cannot escape taxation by fail. that the assignment destroyed the identity of tbe ing to comply with the statutory requirements.-AT partnership, and the act of defendant was not in vio. TORNEY GENERAL V. MASSACHUSETTS PIPK LINE GAS iation of his agreement.-BARRON V. COLLENBAUGH, Co., Mass., 60 N. E. Rep. 389. lowa, 86 N. W. Rep. 53.

17. DEEDS - Constructive Notice.- Where the pur. 10. CONTRACT-Ignorance. – The fact that sureties

chaser of land at a foreclosure sale notifies tenants sigo a bond without reading it, though they have op.

thereon that he is the owner, and instructs them to portunity to do so, in reliance on false representa

pay the rent to him, and they consent thereto, they tions of the principal obligee that it is only a recom

become his tenante; and their possession is construc. mendation of the latter, does not relieve them from

tive potice of the purchaser's interest therein to a perliability thereon.-SPRING GARDEN INS. Co. v. LEM son afterwards acquiring a deed to the land from the vox, Iowa, 86 N. W. Rep. 35.

former owner.-HANNAN V. SEIDENTOPF, Iowa, 86 N. W

Rep. 44. 11. CONTRACT-Option.-An agreement of the ownerg of a certain lot tbat they will not sell it without first

18. DEEDS-Quitclaim.-Land worth $4,000 was sold notifying an adjoiding owner of the intention to sell,

at a foreclosure. The purchaser failed to record his and giving him tbe privilege of buying the ground at deed, and the former owners transferred it by quit. a fair market price, becomes enforceable when the claim deed to G, who conveyed it to M on the follow. owners of the lot, without notifying the adjoining

ing day by warranty deed. The deed to G stated that owner. cause a sale of it to be made by partition pro. it was given in consideration of $1 and other valuable ceedings in tbis court. Such proceedings are a mani.

consideration, and that the grantor made no represen festation of an intention to sell.-MYERS V. METZGER,

tatlong as to the title, other than those contained in N. J., 48 Atl. Rep. 1113.

the deed. G paid for the land with 25,000 shares of

mining stock, for which he had paid $75, and he sold 12. CONTRACT OF SALE - Agent-Oral Warranty.-A

the land to M for $440, and it was purchased by the sales agent authorized to sell and warrant farm ma

latter without seeing it or obtaining an abstract of chinery under written conditions to be required of the

title. Held, in an action by the foreclosure purchaser purchaser may bind his principal by an oral warranty

to recover the land, that the evidence was not suffi where he withholds from the purchaser all knowledge

cient to show that M was an innocent purchaser of tbe limitations upon his authority to impose such

thereof.-HANNAN V. SEIDENTOPF, Iowa, 86 N. W. Rep. condition, as in this case.-PARSONS BAND CUTTER & SELF FEEDER Co. V. HAUB, Min., 86 N. W. Rep. 14.

19. EVIDENCE – Expert Witness - Qualification. 13. CONTRACT OF SALE-Breach of Warranty-Dama.

| Where, in a suit against a railroad for injuries to land ges.-A contract in which it was provided that if a cer.

caused by fire escaping from the right of way, a wit. tain macbine, for and on which potes were given and

ness had resided for years in the neighborhood of the freight charges paid, did not and could not be made to

lands, and had been allowed, without objection, to all the warranty therein contained, it was to be re.

testify as to the value of such lands before they were turned to the place where received, and another ma

burned, an objection to the admission of his testi. chine substituted therefor, or the “money and notes"

mony as to their value after they were burned, on the returned, construed. Held, that the amount paid for

ground that he had only been on a small portion of freight cbarges could be recovered, in addition to the

the lands since the fire, was to the weight, rather than amount of the poteg, in case of a breach of the war.

the competence, of the evidence, and its admission ranty and a failure to substitute another machine.

was not error.-CHICAGO, I. & L. RY. CO. V. BROWN, EVENSON V. KEYSTONE MFG. CO., Mion.,86 N. W. Rep.8.

Ind., 60 N. E. Rep. 346. 14. CORPORATION-Contract-Signature of President.

20. EVIDENCE-Hearing.-Where a brakeman in a Where a contract is consommated entirely tbrough

guit against a railroad for personal injuries testified correspondence, it does not follow, as a matter of law,

that his physician had advised another operation, that the individual signature of the person who is

and that the physician wag too ill to appear at the president and manager of the corporation to letterg

trial, such evidence was incompetent, as hearsay, and is conclusive that he acts in his individual capacity.

prejudicial, as tending to enhance the darnages for He may sign hig individual pame with an intent and

future pain and suffering.-TROTT V. CHICAGO, I. & P. purpose to bind the corporation, and in such case his

RY. Co., Iowa, 86 N. W. Rep. 33. acts would do go, if relied upon by the other contract. ing party.-TOWERS V. STEVENS CATILE Co., Minn., 86

21. EVIDENCE-Judicial Notice-Common Law.-The X. W. Rep. 88.

courts of Minnesota do not take judicial notice of the 15. CORPORATIONS-Lease- Disserting Stockholder.

common law of a sister State.-ORANDALL V. GREAT -Under Stat. 1900, ch. 426, permitting a railroad to

NORTHERN RY, Co., Minn., 86 N. W. Rep. 10. lease another on approval of a majority of the stock 22. EVIDENCE-Transactions with Decedent. - Upon bolders of each corporation, and providing that e

the trial of an action the parties thereto, or persons stockholder shall be deemed to assent to the contract | interested in the event thereof, are incompetent to

45.

prove conversations with, or admissions of, any de. | laying out of a road returned an award in favor of ceased or insane person, wbether a party to the liti. such landowner, and, in a petition by her to recover a gation or not, relative to apy matter at issue between balance of the sum so awarded, she alleged that there the litigants, adhered to, and the rule applied. was sufficient money in the county treasury liable for LOWE V. LOWE, Minn., 86 N. W. Rep. 11.

the payment of a warrant for such balance, but the 23. Ex&CUTORS AND ADMINISTRATORS - Surviving court failed to find, in conformity with such allegaPartner as Executor.-A testator, up to the time of his

tion, that there was money applicable thereto, a judg. death, was engaged in business in partnership with

ment requiring the payment of such balance will be one of the two executors named in the will. After the

reversed, since such claims can only be paid from the testator'g decease such executor continued the busi.

particular fund applicable to the construction of ness as the surviving partner. He then entered into

roads, and not trom general county funds.- BOARD OF an agreement with his co executor, whereby he pur

COMRS. OF MONROE COUNTY V. STATE, Ipd., 60 N. E. chased the interest of the estate at a certain sum, but

Rep. 344. no money was paid to the co-executor, and no ac. 30. HIGHWAY8-Discontinuance - Owner's Rigbt to counting was made to the probate court by either Damages. - Where land claimed to be damaged by the executor. Both executors were discharged without

alteration of a railroad grade croesing was a highway having rendered an accounting, leaving the estate un

when the proceedings for alteration were begun, the administered. In an action against such surviving

fact that in the course of the procerdings tbe highway partner by a subsequently appointed administrator was discontinued, and the land was taken by the rail. de bonis non, to compel an accounting, held, that such road company for railroad purposes, did not preclude surviving partner was not a debtor of the estate at a finding that the land was thereby subjected to a the death of the testator, and that his relation to the more onerous use than it had previously suffered so estate still remained that of executor, and the juris.

as to preclude the owners from proof of damages by diction of the probate court to compel an accounting

reason of tbe alteration.- BULLARD V. NEW YORK, N. was exclusive, and such jurisdiction was not lost by H. & H. R. Co., Mass., 60 N. E. Rep. 381. the fact that the executor was discharged, leaving

31. HUSBAND AND WIYE-Gift to Husband-Presump. the estate unadministered.-BETCHER v. BETCHER, Minn., 86 N. W. Rep. 1.

tion.-The presumption of law is against a gift by the

wife of the principal of her separate property to the 24. FINAL JUDGMENT – Abandonment of Ancillary

husband, and the burden of proving it is upon him Proceedings.- Where, in an action for divorce, a final who asserts it.-ADOUE V. SPENCER, N. J., 49 Atl. Rep. judgment for plaintiff is rendered, without an adjudi. 10. cation being had on an issue in ancillary proceedings of attachment and garniebment, that part of the case

32. HUSBAND AND WIFE-Married Women's Act-Gift

to Husband.-Tbe statutes in the several States as to is abandoned, and the court has no power to after.

the property of married women, when as broad as the wards take up the matter of the attachment and gar.

Texas statute or our own, have entirely overthrown nishment independently, and render a judgment on

the common law rule of the merger of the wife's en those issues.-SAHNER V. SAHNER, Ind., 60 N. E. Rep.

tity and estate, upon marriage, in the husband. It is 269.

unnecessary, under these statutes, tbat a wife shall 25. FIBE INSURANCE - Conditions - Arbitration.-A

take from her husband a promissory note, or other condition in a fire policy requiring tbe submission to acknowledgment, upon banding him money of her arbitration of any difference as to a loss on the re

separate estate, to be able to establish that such takquest in writing of either party, and providing that

ing by him was a load. In the transaction sbe will be no action shall be brought on the policy until after

considered as a feme sole, and as if a stranger to her the award, is waived on a failure of either party to husband.-ADOUE V. SPENCER, N. J., 49 Atl. Rep. 10. request an arbitration.-GARRETTSON v. MERCHANTS'

33. HUSBAND AND WIFE — Widow's Remarriage & BANKERS' FIRE INs. Co., Iowa, 86 N. W. Rep. 32.

Mortgage.- Where a woman and her second husband 26. FRAUDULENT CONVEYANCES-Husband's Deed to

executed a mortgage on land which descended from Wite.-A conveyance of land by a husband to his wife

her first husband to her as big widow, there bei by a deed through a third party, to secure her for the

children of such marriage living, thus violating principal of money of her separate estate taken and Burps' Rev. St. 1694, § 2641 (Rev. St. 1881, 82484; Horn. used by him, will be decreed to be a mortgage, and

er's Rev. St. 1897, § 2484), which forbids & widow re. good as against creditors to the extent only of the

marrying to alienate real estate held by virtue of her amount of the principal so received by him, with in.

previous marriage, etc., a decree of foreclosure terest thereon from the date of the delivery of such

thereon will be binding on the wife, and cannot be deed.-ADOUX V. SPENCER, N. J., 49 Atl. Rep. 10.

collaterally attacked.-MAYNARD V. WAIDLICH, Ind., 27. FRAUDULENT CONVEYANCES-Husband's Deed to 60 N. E. Rep. 349. Wife_Burden of Proof.- Where such a conveyance is

34. INJONCTION-Separate Actions at Law-Relief in attacked by creditors as voluntary or fraudulent, the

Equity.-Wbere a common right or a community of burden is on the wife to establish that ber husband

interest in the subject matter of a controversy, or a ook and used her separate estate; but when that fact

common title, from which all of the defendants' sep. is established, whether such taking was with or with.

arate claims, and all questions at issue between the out her consent, the burden tben hilts, and those

parties plaintiff and defendante, have arisen, can be claiming that such taking and use were by gift of the

shown at the trial, an equitable action will lie to rewife must establish such gift to the husband.-ADOUE strain and enjoin the several defendants from prose. V. SPENCER, N. J., 49 Atl. Rep. 10.

cuting separate actions at law against the plaintiff. 28. DAMAGES-Highways.-In an action for the con. Held, that under this rule a cause of action was stated struction of a switch track in the public highway in

in plaintiff's fourth amended complaint herein. Held, front of plaintiff's property, an instruction that fartber, that, as the complaint stated a cause of plaintiff could not recover the amount her property action, it was not error for the court below to cause depreciated in value by the meang of access thereto an order to be issued restraining and prohibiting each being impaired, is not erroneous as not copfining the of the said defendants from proceeding further in his damages to the time of bringing the action, since the action at law pending the disposition of this action in action was not brought on the theory of an unlawful equity.-CITY OF ALBERT LEA V. NIELSEN, Mipn., 86 N. obstruction, but as a trespass on plaintiff s land. W. Rep. 83. PITTSBURGH C. C. & ST. L. Ry.Co. V. NOFTSKER, Ind., 35. INJURY TO RAILROAD EMPLOYEE- Evidence.-The 60 N. E. Rep. 372.

complaint alleges that defendant operates a rallroad 29. HIGHWAYS-Damages.-Where a jury appointed in Montana, and negligently permitted its roadbed to to assess damages sustained by a landowner in the become soft and springy, and allowed sand, gravel

42. LIMITATIONS-Wills - Probate.-Under Code Civ. Proc. § 2628, relating to the running of four years' limitation after the death of an owner of realty, and de. claring that, “If the will was concealed by one or more of the heirs of the testator, tbe limitation" would not begin to run until the delivery of the will to the devisee or to bis representatives, or to the proper surrogate, the fact that after the death of an heir a will was found among comparatively worthless papers in his house does not show concealment, within the meaning of the statute, where, after the death of the testator, it was put in evidence in an tion to set aside & subsequent will, and all the l knew of its existence and contents.-FOX V. FEE, N. Y., 60 N. E. Rep. 281.

43. MASTER AND SERVANT-Contributory Negligence. -Plaintiff, a brakeman, attempted to uncouple two cars with a lever provided for the purprse; but the coupling was out of order, and he could not thus draw the pin. He attempted to draw it with his hand, and while walking between the moving cars his foot was caught between the rail and an unblocked guard reil, whereby he was injured. Held, that plaintiff's contributory negligence, or assumption of risk incident to the condition of the guard rail, was a question for the jury.-TROTT v. CAICAGO, ETC. RY. 00., Iowa, 86 N. W. Rep. 33.

and stone to be deposited and remain on and near its track, and that it also pegligently operated an engine with a defective pilot. While respondent, in the per. formance of his duties as a brakeman, was riding in the cab of the engine, it gank upon the yielding road. bed, and the defective pilot struck into the gravel and stone, causing a stone to be thrown against the cab window of the engine, breaking the glass thereof, causing a piece of it to enter and injure respondent's eye. Held, that the acts stated were the proximate cause of the injury.- BAKER V. GBEAT NORTHERN RY. Co., Minn., 86 N. W. Rep. 83.

36. INSURANCE-Excessive Incumbrance.- Where an insured procured a loan on the insured property, with the proceeds of which he paid off incumbrances existing at the time the policy was issued, and later placed an additional mortgage on the property, ag. gregating $3, 230, the property will not be deemed to bave been incumbered for more than $3,000, within the terms of the policy, $400 of the mortgage having been paid before the loss occurred.-MCKIBBAN V. DES MOINES IN8. Co., Iowa, 86 N. W. Rep. 39.

37. INTOXICATING LIQUORS-Liquor Tax CertificateAction on Bond.-Liquor Tax Law, $ 23, provides that do person who has been convicted of a felony shall trafic in liquor or be granted a liquor certificate. An application for a liquor license falsely stated that the applicant had never been convicted of a felony. Held, that a surety op his bond, conditioned that the principal would not violate any provision of the liquor tax law, did not guaranty the truth of the statement, and, in the absence of knowledge of its falsity, was not liable for the acts of the principal id selling liquor un. der the certificate, wbich, at the election of the State, was void ab initio.- LYMAN V. SCHERMERHORN, N.Y.. 60 N. E. Rep. 324.

38. LANDLORD AND TENANT-Lease - Coal Lands. Plaintiffs' lease of coal lands to defendante gave them power to mine and remove all underlying coal. The refuse from the various sbatts was to be dumped on tbe surface of plaintiffs' land. A right of way over the surface for railway track, etc., within specified limits was given to defendants at a certain rental, with privilege to continue such use at their option after the coal had been exhausted from plaintiffs' land. The surface was reserved by plaintiffs for agri. coltural or other parposes, subject to the rights granted by the lease. Held, that defendants bad the rigbt, under the lease, to use the land to remove coal trom adjoining land, and hence plaintiffs could not recover additional compensation therefor.-MADISON F. GARFIELD COAL CO., Iowa, 86 N. W. Rep. 41.

39. LANDLORD AND TENANT - Lien for Rent.-In an action for the conversion of grain on which plaintiff claimed a landlord's lien, the fact that plaintiff had Deglected to exhaust other property of the tenant on wbich be had a lien was no defense where, after giy. ing credit for the value of this property, there was still a balance due greater than the amount of plaintiff's recovery.-DERMIDY V. INTERSTATE GRAIN Co., Iowa, 86 N. W. Rep. 80.

40. LIFE INSURANCE-Surrender-Rights of Bene. Sciary.- A beneficiary cannot enforce by action at law an original policy by treating payments made on a substituted policy issued without her knowledge, on surrender of the original, as payments made on the latter, and ipuring to her benefit.-WEATHERBEE V. NEW YORK LIFE INS. CO., Mass., 60 N. K. Rep. 381.

41. LIMITATIONS-Running of Statute – Administra. tor's Bond.-The statute of limitations commences to run against a cause of action from the time it accrues, or from the time when the holder thereof has the right to apply to the court for relief, and to commence proceedings to enforce his rights. The statute of lim. Itations commences to run against an action on a bond of an administrator from the time of the final decree of distribution.-GANSER V. GANSER, Minn., 86 N. W. Rep. 18.

44. MASTER AND SERVANT - Negligence.-Plaintiff worked as a common laborer for defendant several years, and two weeks before the accident delendant's superintendent directed plaintiff to wash out a sewer hole in the slaughter house. The fireman adjusted tbe hoge and nozzle, and, with the assistance of two med to handle the hose, plaintiff entered the hole and washed it out. The next week plaintiff applied to the superintendent for men to assist in handling the hose to wash out the hole, and was told that he did not need help, but must do it himself. The sewer wag pot cleaned at that time, as the pipe was burst, and the next time plaintiff went to clean it he attached the hose, took the nozzle, and went into the hole; and when the water was turned on the hoge became up. manageable, and be was struck and injured by the nozzle. The water had a pressure of 80 pounds, with which pressure it required three men to handle the hose. Held, that the questions of defendant's negli. gence, and whether plaintiff assumed the risk or was guilty of contributory negligence, were for the jury.DIEZI V. G. H. HAMMOND CO., Iod., 60 N. E. Rep. 353.

45. MASTER AND SERVANT-Vice-Principal – Negli. gence.-The plaintiff and S, the servants of the defendant, were assigned the duty of loading a pile. driver hammer opon a wagon. In doing so they used a tree standing by as a tackle post, which was up. rooted, sell, and injured the plaintiff, by reason of the force applied in an attempt to swing the hammer upon the wagon by the use of the tackle. S selected the tree and directed the work as foreman, Held, upon the special facts of this case, that the tree was not an appliance furnished by the defendant, but a mere temporary instrumentality provided by tbe servants themselves during the progress of the work, and that in selecting the tree & was not acting as a vice princi. pal.-BELL V. LANG, Minn., 86 N. W. Rep. 95.

ECHANIO'S LIEN-Statement - Amendment.-A mechanic's lien statement cappot, as to third persons who have acquired rights and interests in the land covered thereby adverse to the lien claimant, be amended to the prejudice of the rights of such third persons after it has been filed in the office of the register of deeds, and after the expiration of the time limited by statutes for filing of the same.-MKEHAN V. ST. PAUL, ETC. Ry. Co., Minn., 86 N. W. Rep. 19.

47. MORTGAGE8-Foreclosure - Attorney's Fees-Injunction-Auctioneer's Fees.-W bere a mortgages is compelled to defend an injunction against a sale of the mortgaged premises, the injunction being dis. gutter of wbich a spout led to a groove in and cross. ing the sidewalk. The water flowing through the spuut formed ice on the walk, rendering it dangerous to public travel, and causing injury to plaintiff. Held, that so maintaining the spout constituted a public nuisance, and defendant was not exonerated by tbe fact that the conditions existed when gbe purchased

ae property, and no previous complaint bad been made, since, the nuisance being public, her predeces. sor could not have acquired a right to maintain it.LEAHAN V. COCHRAN, Mass., 60 N. E, Rep. 388.

55. PARK COMMISSIONERS-Powers-Conveyance of Land – Exemption from Taxation - Contract.-Laws 1889 confers authority upon the board of park commissioners of the city of Minneapolis to contract for the conveyance of land to the city for park purposes in consideration of the exemption of other contiguous lands of the owner from assessments for park pur. poses, to the amount agreed upon. Such exemptions are not limited by the act to a single assessment made with relerence to the property 80 purchased, but include all assessments, present or future, and also installments not yet entered for collection, but which have been assessed prior to the execution of the contract.-STATE V. DISTRICT COURT OF FOURTH JUDICIAL Dist., Mipn., 86 N. W. Rep. 15.

56. PARTITION - Remainders.-Testatrix devised her house and lot to her daughter, subject to the condition that, if such daughter died before either of her grand. children, all of the legacies given to the daughter un. der the will should revert to the grandchildren. Held that, in the absence of any intention to restrict the alienation, the bouse and lot descended to the grandchildren in pareels, for which partition might be maintained.-PULSE V. OSBORN, Ind., 60- N. E. Rep. 374.

solved, attorney's fees incurred by the mortgagee in removing an injunction were reasonably necessary and hence rightfully allowed from the proceeds on foreclosure. A fee paid an auctioneer in selling property under foreclosure proceedings which is the ordinary and customary charge for such services without express agreement, and under the belief that auctioneers were entitled to such amount, is properly allowed, though there was reasonable probability that an auctioneer might bave been found who would have conducted the sale for a much lower tee.-BANGS v. FALLON, Mass., 60 N. E. Rep. 403.

48. MONICIPAL CORPORATION - Action on ContractMandamus.-Where plaintiff agreed to furnish a cer. tain number of lights for the streets, and the town agreed to pay a certain rate per year, payments to be made every month, but not in advance, and after a certain month the town refused payment, pot because

Jacked funds, but asserting that the contract wag

i, plaintiff's action for the amount due was prop. rly brought on the contract, instead of by application for mandamus.-TOWN OF GOSPORT V. PRITCHARD, Ind., 59 N. E. Rep. 1058.

49. MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS-Contract--Signature. -A contract for lighting streets, purporting to be the contract of the town, and signed by one as president of the board of trustees, and attested by the clerk, and entered on the proceedings of the board of trustees, is binding on the town, and is not merely the contract of the persons whose names are signed.-TOWN OF GosPORT V. PRITCHARD, Ind., 59 N. E. Rep. 1058.

50. MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS - Heavy Teams-Unreasonable Ordinance.-An ordinance of the board of park commissioners of the city ot Minneapolis provides that no vehicle whicb, together with its load weighs more than 2,000 pounds, and which is in use tor carrying goods, merchandise, building material, ma. nure, dirt, earth, or other article or commodity, and which has tires less than six inches in widtb, such shall pass or enter upon any park or parkway. Held, as applicable to a parkway, the ordinance is void, because unreasonable, and in its effect prohibitive of traffic thus classified.-STATE V. ROHART, Minn., 86 N. W. Rep. 93.

51. MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS-Injuries to Traveler on Highway.-Plaintiff's horse was frightened by a

in constructing a street in de fendant city, dumping stone on the wooden platform of a stone crusher, and the escape of steam from the crusher, which caused a rupaway, and the injuries for which plaintiff sued. The street on which the work was being done was laid out with two roadways, and the road on which plaintiff was driving was open to travel, though this fact was contradicted. Held sufi cient to justily refusal to direct verdict for defendant, requested on the ground of plaintiff'g assumption of the risk.-BUTMAN V. CITY OF NEWTON, Mass., 60 N. E. Rep. 401.

52. MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS - Obstruction of Streets.-Evidence that the road supervisor author. ized defendant to erect scales in a street is not admig. gible in an action for injuries received because of such scales, since the road supervisor had no authority to grant such right, and evidence of an ordinance authorizing defendant to maintain stock yards within the limits of a municipal corporation, but not on its streets, is immaterial, in an action for a personal in. jury resulting from the maintenance of scales in the street.-RUPP V. HOWARD, Iowa, 86 N. W. Rep. 38.

53. NEGLIGENCE-Dumping Stone.-Dumping stone on the wooden platform of a stone crusher, and the letting off of steam from the crusher, just as a horse being driven along a roadway, 25 feet away, wag op posite and in plain gigbt, is sufficient to support a find. ing of negligence.-BUTMAN V. CITY OF NEWTON, Mass., 60 N. E. Rep. 491.

54. NUISANCE - Ice - Sidewalk.-Defendant pur. chased, and thereafter occupied, a house from the

57. PARTITION — Remainder Men.-A remainder-man is not entitled to recover of bis fellow remainder-men for improvements of the property made by him dur. ing the occupancy of the lite tenant, as the remain. der.men were not tenants in common at the time the improvements wore made, such relation not existing until they were entitled to possession.-PULSE V. Os. BORN, Ind., 60 N. E. Rep. 374.

58. PENAL STATUTES — Action to Enforce a PenaltyLimitation.-Gen. Laws 1896, ch. 234, $ 4, allowing 20 years for bringing an action on a specialty, and not chapter 288, 88, allowing one year for bringing suits founded on any penal statute, is the statute of limitations applicable to an action authorized by chapter

180, $ 22, to enforce the individual liability of stock. I holders for the debts of the corporation in case of non-performance of statutory duties, since the action, though of a penal character, is not an action to en. force a penalty, within the meaning of the words “penal statute," as used in chapter 288.-KILTON V. PROVIDENCE TOOL Co., R. I., 48 Atl. Rep. 1039.

59. PHYSICIANS AND SURGEONS - Failure to Answer Call-Liability.-A physician, licensed to practice medicine under Act 1897, p. 255, and Act 1899, p. 247, au. thorizing the licensing of physicians found to possess the necessary qualifications, etc., is not liable for arbitrarily refusing to respond to a call, though he is the only pbysician available.-HORLEY V. EDDINGFIELD, Ind., 59 N. E. Rep. 1058.

60. PHYSICIANS AND SURGEONS - Negligence-Dam. ages.- Plaintiff, a farm band, was compelled to have his fingers amputated. Defendant, a physician, per formed the operation. Afterwards he refused to further attend him, and amputation of the arm be. came necessary. Plaintiff sued defendant for negll. gence. Proof was given, over defendant's objection, of what plaintiff earned before and after the loss of his arm. Defendant contended that proof should be confined to the loss of his earning capacity after the removal of his fingers, which operation was conceded to be necessary. Held not to be reversible error, where the jury's verdict showed that due considera

tion was given to such difference in physical perfec. | the risk was hazardous, that they were making exten. tion.-Rich Y. MOORE, Iowa, 86 N. W. Rep. 52.

sions of the plant, and that the property was liable to 61. PLEADING AND PRACTICE – Common Law.-In damage if permitted to remain in their possession. pleading the common law of another State it is suff Held, that the court was justified in appointing a recient to state as a fact what the law is, witbout setting ceiver to manage the property pending an action to out decisions of the courts. Decisions, opinions, and

enforce specific performance of such contract.- MEAD customs constitute the evidence of the law.-CRANDALL V. BORK, Ind., 60 N. E. Rep. 338. V. GREAT NORTHERN R. Co., Minn., 86 N. W. Rep. 10. 68. RECEIVER8-Assets.- Where one, in obedience to

62. PLEADING AND PRACTICE - Equitable Action an order of a court of competent jurisdiction, bas Trial by Jury.- Where the heir of a graptor, who had turned over to a receiver appointed by it assets in his deeded land to trustees for the erection and mainte.

hands belonging to an insolvent, he cannot be comnance of a library, sought to rescind the deeds on the pelled, in a suit in another court, between different ground that the grantor was not of sound mind at the

parties, to account therefor.-CARTER V. DIME SAV. time of the execution thereof, and, further, tbat the BANK, Neb., 86 N. W. Rep. 29. grapteos exercised undue influence or fraud, and 69. REPLEVIN-Body of Dead Dog.-A comnlaint in prayed in her complaint for an accounting, the action replevin to recover tbe body of a dead dog alleged the was an equitable one, and hence plaintiff was not en. wrongful taking and detention, and that the body was titled to a trial by jury as a matter of right.-CARPEN. of the value of two dollars, in that the hide was of the TER . WILLARD LIBRARY TRUSTEES, Ipd., 60 N. E. value of one dollar, and the carcass, exclusive of the Rep. 365.

hide, of the value of one dollar for fertilizing pur. 63. PLEDGE – Warehouse Receipts.-Where a ware poses. Held, that the complaint stated a cause of achouse receipt has been transferred as collateral, the

tion, under Burns' Rev. St. 1894, $ 1286, providing that, pledgee has the right to take pogsession of the prop. when any personal goods are wrongfully taken or uperty on the surrender and cancellation of the receipt,

lawfully detained, the owner may bring an action for subject to the lien of the warehouseman for storage,

the possession thereof, since dogs are property, and but is not compelled to do so or pay the charges on

the ownership is not lost by the death of the apimal, the property.-DRIGOS V. DEAN, N. Y., 60 N. E. Rep.

especially ir the body is of value.-VANTBEESE V. Mc. 336.

GEE, Ind., 60 N. E. Rep. 318. 64. POBLIC SCHOOL-Detention of Minor.- Where

70. REPLEVIN-l'leading-General Depial.- A plea of the return of the State guperintendent to the writ in general denial is sufficient to entitle the defendant to such a case shows that bis detention of a female minor | a return of the goods on a judgment in his favor.child is based upon a tipding of the probate court that

D'ARCY V. STEUER, Mass., 60 N. E. Rep. 405. she possessed proper qualifications of age, health, 71. RES ADJUDICATA.- Where plaintiffs eued de fend. and intelligence; that she was neglected; that her ants to enjoin a specified use of leased lands as pot mother is hopelessly insane and detained in the State within a lease, submitting the question for determina. hospital; that ber father is unable to and does not tion whether such use wag proper under the lease, care to support her, in consequence of which she is on and the case was dismissed on it merite, such adjudi. the street, and in peril of health and morality,-the cation will constitute a bar to a subsequent suit by order of the probate court committing such walfe to plaintiffs against delendants presenting the same the public school is valid, and justifies her detention question with reference to defendants' rights under by the superintendent of that institution, under sec. the lease.-MADISON V. GARFIELD COAL Co., Iowa, 86 tion 3, ch. 210, Gen. Laws 1897.-STATE V. MEBRILL, N. W. Rep. 41. Midn., 86 N. W. Rep. 89.

72. SALES-Warranty-Time.- Where a contract of 65. REAL PROPERTY — Action to Quiet Title.-Where sale of machiney gave the purchaser a certain time in tbe title to real estate is in a husband and wife, and

which to accept and approve a governor which was the latter dies, and the former sues to qulet title as

part thereof, and the evidence showed that before the against her beirs, though no administration has been expiration of the period he notified the seller that the granted on her state, and the time therefor has not governor was not satisfactory, leading to negotia. expired, the heirs, who delend by filling a cross bill to tions on the part of the seller to have the detect partition the land, cannot join therein an application remedied, pending which there was nothing to show for the division of personal property owned by the

that elther party considered the time for acceptance wile, since such beirs are not entitled to share in the

as running, no acceptance will be implied on the part possession and control of the personal property until

of the purchaser at the end of the time limited in the after an administration, or the expiration of the time

contract.-JAMES LEFFEL & Co. v. PIATT, Mich., 86 N. therefor.-RITCHIE V. BARNES, Iowa, 86 N. W. Rep. 48. W. Rep. 66. 66. REAL PROPERTY-Taxes- Payment by Co-Tepant.

73. SURETIES – Liabilities. - Where a bond of an - A tenant in common paid taxes on the property dur. agent to his principal does not contain a general pro. ing the tenancy of his mother, lite tenant thereof, but

vision to answer for the default of the agent, and a It did not appear that he paid them on account of the provision creating a specific liability in case of such failure ot bis mother to do so, or that he pald them default is defective in leaving the amount blank, the after default. Held, that he would not be allowed for

sureties are not liable thereon.-SPRING GARDEN INS. the taxes in partition proceedings, since it was

Co. V. LEMMON, Iowa, 86 N. W. Rep. 35. life tenant's primary duty to pay them.-BOOTH V. 74. TAXATION-Assignment for Benefit of CreditosBOOTH, Iowa, 86 N. W. Rep. 51.

Listing by Assignee.- Personal property in the pog. 67. RECEIVERS-Appointment Pendente Lite-Pre

session of an assignee for the benefit of creditors of a requisites.- Barns' Rev. St. 1894, § 1236, provides that

manufacturing corporation, which is not being rea receiver may be appointed in all actions where it is

duced to money for distribution among the creditors shown that the property in controversy is in danger

of the corporation, but is being held and operated, of being lost, removed, or injured, or where, in the

under the orders of the insolvency court, and at the discretion of the court, it may be necessary to secure

Joint request of the creditors of the assignee, in the apple justice to the parties. Appellants contracted

conduct of a going business, – such business being to sell appellees an electric lighting plant, appelleeg conducted as it bad been theretofore by the corpora to deposit a certain amount in a certain bank within

tion itself,- is subject to taxation, and it is the duty of a stated period in payment thereof, which the latter

the assignee to list such property for taxation.did. Appellants refused to convey, but hold posses. FRENCH V. BOBE, Ohio, 60 N. E. Rep. 292. sion and operated the plant, refusing to pay over the 75. TAXATION – Illegal Tax – Injunction. - Burns' income thereof, which was being wasted. It appeared Supp. 1897, $ 8421a, provides that all personal property that appellants refused to carry any insurance, that I shall be assessed to the owner in the township, town,

« ПредишнаНапред »