held unjustifiable. Le Roy v. De Vry Corpora- 1,184,254. Die for manufacturing roofing tiles, tion, 16 F. (2d) 18. Injunction after expiration of patent held improper, in absence of showing defendant had 1,190,615. stock of infringing articles for placing on mar ket.-Id. held invalid for want of invention (C. C. A. Cal.) 16 F. (2d) 50. Plastic composition, held void for anticipation (C. C. A. Mo.) 16 F. (2d) 446. 310(1) (U.S.D.C.N.Y.) Bill must allege 1,197,256. Articles of stainless steel, held to patentee invented devices in suit (equity rule 25).-Davis v. Motive Parts Corporation, 16 F. (2d) 148. Bill seeking to hold individual agents liable 1,210,502. for patent infringement should allege what they did in their own behalf.-Id. 312(1) (U.S.D.C.N.Y.) Stainless steel, manufactured and sold for cutlery purposes, 1,225,682. must be assumed, on accounting for infringement, to have been so used.-American Stainless Steel Co. v. Ludlum Steel Co., 16 F.(2d) 823. 1,271,527. 312(3) (U.S.D.C.N.J.) Payment of royalties by business men, as determining validity of patents, is not substitute for judgment of court.-Lektophone Corporation V. Brandes 1,271,529. Products Corporation, 16 F. (2d) 934. 318(1) (U.S.C.C.A.N.Y.) Only actual profits held recoverable in accounting for patent infringement.-Vapor Car Heating Co. v. Gold Car Heating & Lighting Co., 16 F. (2d) 194. 1,289,492. 327 (U.S.D.C.Mass.) Decree restraining patent infringement suits held res judicata in suit to restrain suits on reissue patent.-Erik- 1,299,404. son v. Frink Co., 16 F. (2d) 498. include method of making stainless steel (D. C. N. Y.) 16 F. (2d) 823. Sash bar for supporting glass in green-houses, claim 7, held valid and infringed (D. C. N. Y.) 16 F. (2d) 490. Counter refrigerator, claims 1 and 2, held not infringed, and claim 3, valid and infringed (C. C. A. Mo.) 16 F.(2d) 571. Cone type loud speaker, claims 29 and 30, held invalid (D. C. N. J.) 16 F.(2d) 934; held not infringed (C. C. A. N. Y.) 16 F. (2d) 7, 10. Cone type loud speaker, held invalid, and not infringed (D. C. N. J.) 16 F.(2d) 934; claims 1-4, and 8, held not infringed (C. C. A. N. Y.) 16 F.(2d) 7, 10. Process for manufacturing tile and for tile, held void (C. C. A. Cal.) 16 F. (2d) 50. Articles of stainless steel, held to include method of making stainless steel (D. C. N. Y.) 16 F.(2d) 823. 327 (U.S.D.C.N.Y.) Adjudication of invalidity of patent, not appealed from, is law in 1,320,662. Doughnut machine, claim 1, held val subsequent patent infringement suit in same district. Traitel Marble Co. v. U. T. Hungerford Brass & Copper Co., 16 F. (2d) 495. XIII. DECISIONS ON THE VALIDITY, CON- 328. UNITED STATES. DESIGN. id and infringed (C. C. A. Cal.) 16 F. (2d) 556. 1,329,303. Frame for weaving Axminster carpets, held void (Č. C. A. Mass.) 16 F. (2d) 685. 1,360,256. Can opener, held valid and infringed (C. C. A. N. Y.) 16 F. (2d) 353. 1,411,231. Acceleration of rubber vulcanization, held valid and not anticipated (C. C. A. Pa.) 16 F. (2d) 419. 1,435,429. Furring nails for holding wire netting against walls, held valid (D. C. Cal.) 16 F. (2d) 1008. 42,398. Towel cabinet, held valid and infringed 1,469,185. Improvement in weaving frames, (C. C. A. Minn.) 16 F.(2d) 666. ORIGINAL. 925,896. Steamheating system for railway cars, claim 5, held infringed (C. C. A. N. Y.) 16 F. (2d) 194. 935,205. Railway frog, held valid and infringed (C. Č. A. Pa.) 16 F. (2d) 383. 944,187. Heating system for railway cars, claims 12 and 20, held not infringed (C. C. A. N. Y.) 16 F. (2d) 194. 995,758. Anti-friction tips for furniture, held not infringed (C. C. A. Conn.) 16 F. (2d) 999. 1,007,498. Electric illuminating device, held invalid, and not infringed, if valid (D. C. Mass.) 16 F. (2d) 496. 1,042,457. Telegraphic sending machine, claims 4 and 5, held not infringed (C. C. claims 3 and 4, held not infringed (C. C. A. Mass.) 16 F. (2d) 685. 1,482,952. Reinforced rubber flooring and process of manufacture held invalid for want of invention (C. C. A. N. J.) 16 F. (2d) 742. Can opener, held valid and infringed 1,528,178. (C. C. A. N. Y.) 16 F. (2d) 353. Furring nail, claims 1, 3, and 5, held invalid for anticipation (D. C. Cal.) 16 F. (2d) 1008. REISSUED. 13,059. Heating system for railway cars, claims 1, 6 and 7, held valid and infringed, and claims 17, 18, 19 and 21, held void (C. C. A. N. Y.) 16 F. (2d) 194. 15,210. Superheater boiler, claims 1, 2, 4, and 6, held not anticipated, and infringed (C. C. A. N. Y.) 16 F. (2d) 964. 1,042,472. Match book machine, held entitled 15,824. Improvements in guide strips used in to wide range of equivalents; 1,141,520. Superheater boiler, claims 4, 6, 7, laying floors, held invalid (D. C. N. Y.) 16 F. (2d) 495. 15,829. For making brick and hollow tile, held and 9, held not anticipated and 16,103. Furring nail, claims 1-13, held valid, 1,156,122. Fibrous composition and process of but not infringed, claims 14-18, held invalid, as broader than original patent (D. C. Cal.) 16 F. (2d) 1008. PAYMENT. I. REQUISITES AND SUFFICIENCY. 12(5) (U.S.C.C.A.Minn.) Carriers of shipments from Canada to United States on joint through tariffs held entitled to demand payment For cases in Dec.Dig. & Am.Dig. Key-No.Series & Indexes see same topic and KEY-NUMBER St. §§ 6287g-6287q]).-White v. U. S., 16 F. PERJURY. 1. OFFENSES AND RESPONSIBILITY 11(7) (U.S.C.C.A.N.Y.) Test of materiality in grand jury investigation is whether false testimony impedes or dissuades grand jury from pursuing investigation.-Carroll v. U. S., 16 F. (2d) 951. II. PROSECUTION AND PUNISHMENT. 36 (U.S.C.C.A.N.Y.) Trial court's ruling as matter of law that testimony before grand jury was material with respect to violation of prohibition law held not erroneous (Criminal Code, 125 [Comp. St. § 10295]).-Carroll v. U. S., 16 F. (2d) 951. Materiality of testimony before grand jury is question of law for court.-Id. Evidence of perjury held for jury (Criminal Code, § 125 [Comp. St. § 10295]).—Id. PLEADING. For pleadings in particular actions or proceed- I. FORM AND ALLEGATIONS IN GENERAL. 8(7) (U.S.D.C.Fla.) Allegation in complaint stating complainant's right to avoid contract for infancy held allowable conclusion of law. Bernstein v. Biscayne View Corporation, 16 F.(2d) 1010. 8(13) (U.S.C.C.A.Ohio) Allegation that constructing quartermaster lacked authority to make binding settlement under cost-plus contract for construction of army cantonment held mere conclusion.-U. S. v. A. Bentley & Sons Co., 16 F. (2d) 895. 8(15) (U.S.C.C.A.Ohio) Allegations of fraudulent breach of cost-plus army cantonment construction contract held mere conclu sions.-U. S. v. A. Bentley & Sons Co., 16 F. (2d) 895. 18 (U.S.C.C.A.III.) Allegation that defendants did not have honest intention and purpose to do things charged in indefinite way cannot be made basis of action for fraud.-Anastasopoulos v. Steger & Sons Piano Mfg. Co., 16 F. (2d) 32. 34 (5) (U.S.C.C.A.Ohio) Allegations of government's petition that constructing quartermaster was not successor of contracting officer as to work under cost-plus contract held negatives pregnant.-U. S. v. A. Bentley & Sons Co., 16 F.(2d) 895. IX. BILL OF PARTICULARS AND COPY OF ACCOUNT. 316 (U.S.C.C.A.Alaska) Ruling on motion for bill of particulars rests in discretion of court (Comp. Laws Alaska 1913, § 908). Alaska S. S. Co. v. Katzeek, 16 F. (2d) 210. XI. MOTIONS. 367 (3) (U.S.D.C.Fla.) Allegation of complaint that on reaching maturity plaintiff elected to rescind contract and demanded return of payment held sufficient as against motion to make specific.-Bernstein v. Biscayne View Corporation, 16 F. (2d) 1010. 369(1) (U.S.C.C.A.Porto Rico) Cause for breach of contract of transportation held improperly joined with one for slander; at least election was necessary.-New York & Porto Rico S. S. Co. v. Garcia, 16 F. (2d) 734. POISONS. 2 (U.S.C.C.A.Cal.) Statute providing guilt may be inferred from possession of narcotics is constitutional (Harrison Narcotic Act [Comp. 2 (U.S.C.C.A.Idaho) Harrison Anti-Narcotic Act held not invalid, as invading police powers of state (Harrison Anti-Narcotic Act, §§ 2, 6 [Comp. St. §§ 6287h, 62877]).-Watson v. U. S., 16 F. (2d) 52. 4 (U.S.C.C.A.La.) Physician prescribing narcotic for other than bona fide patient, and not in course of professional treatment, is not protected by statutory exemption (Harrison Anti-Narcotic Act, § 2 [Comp. St. § 6287h]). -Bush v. U. S., 16 F. (2d) 709. Violation of regulations facilitating collection of tax is offense, without showing government was deprived of revenue (Harrison Anti-Narcotic Act, as amended [Comp. St. §§ 6287g6287r]).-Id. 9 (U.S.C.C.A.Cal.) Statute making possession of narcotic drugs presumptive evidence of unlawful importation applies to all such drugs (Act Feb. 9, 1909, § 2, as amended by JonesMiller Act, § 1, subd. [f], being Comp. St. § 8801).-Hooper v. U. S., 16 F. (2d) 868. Evidence held to sustain conviction of selling narcotic drugs.-Id. 9 (U.S.C.C.A.Cal.) Burden of proving possession of narcotics lawful, because imported prior to effective date of statute or otherwise, held on accused.-White v. U. S., 16 F. (2d) 870. 9 (U.S.C.C.A.Idaho) Indictment charging sale of paregoric containing opium held to charge accused was person required to register (Harrison Anti-Narcotic Act, § 2 Comp. St. § 6287h]).-Watson v. U. S., 16 F. (2d) 52. ics held sufficient (Harrison Anti-Narcotic Act, Indictment charging unlawful sale of narcot$2 [Comp. St. § 6287h]).-Id. 9 (U.S.C.C.A.La.) Evidence held to show physician was not dispensing morphine in bona fide manner.-Bush v. U. S., 16 F. (2d) 709. 9 (U.S.C.C.A.La.) Evidence of possession of morphine not in stamped packages held sufficient for jury (Harrison Anti-Narcotic Act, § 1, as amended [Comp. St. § 6287g]).-Davis v. U. S., 16 F. (2d) 778. 9 (U.S.C.C.A.Mo.) Evidence held to sustain conviction of sale of morphine (Harrison AntiNarcotic Act [Comp. St. §§ 6287g-6287q]).Crampton v. U. S., 16 F. (2d) 231. Proof of previous transactions is not necessary to show sale of narcotics (Harrison Anti-Narcotic Act [Comp. St. §§ 6287g-6287q]).—Id. Proof of possession of narcotics prima facie establishes possessor was dealer (Harrison Anti-Narcotic Act [Comp. St. §§ 6287g-6287q]). -Id. Evidence of possession of narcotics held to show defendant dealer.-Id. Court's statements, intended to eliminate from case irrelevant matter concerning acts of officers in store where morphine was sold, held not error.-Id. POLICE POWER. See Constitutional Law, 81; Municipal Corporations, 619. POST OFFICE. III. OFFENSES AGAINST POSTAL LAWS. 33 (U.S.C.C.A.Cal.) Essence of offense of "using mails to defraud" is making of false promises or representations (Penal Code, § 215 [Comp. St. § 10385]).-Barnard v. U. S., 16 F. (2d) 451. Mailing letters in aid of fraudulent scheme by agents or clerks is causing them to be mailed (Penal Code, § 215 [Comp. St. 10385]).—Id. 48 (8) (U.S.C.C.A.Ark.) Though indictment in oil stock mail fraud case alleged intent to appropriate money, charge that use to be made of money was immaterial held proper (Criminal Code, §§ 37, 215 [Comp. St. §§ 10201, 10385]).-Nelson v. U. S., 16 F. (2d) 71. 49 (U.S.C.C.A.Ark.) In oil stock mail fraud case, certified copy of assignment of lease to defendant held properly excluded as irrelevant (Criminal Code, §§ 37. 215 [Comp. St. $$ 10201, 10385]).-Nelson v. U. S., 16 F.(2d) 71. In oil stock mail fraud case, testimony that defendant believed he had title held properly excluded (Criminal Code, §§ 37, 215 [Comp. St. §§ 10201, 10385]).-Id. 49 (U.S.C.C.A.Cal.) Evidence held to sustain conviction for using mails to defraud (Penal Code, $ 215 [Comp. St. § 10385]).Barnard v. U. S., 16 F. (2d) 451. Minnesota Law.-U. S. Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. Vermont Marble Co., 16 F. (2d) 83. 73 (U.S.C.C.A.Md.) Surety is liable for interest from time when it was its duty to make payment.-New Amsterdam Casualty Co. v. U. S. Shipping Board Emergency Fleet Corporation, to Use of U. S., 16 F. (2d) 847. III. DISCHARGE OF SURETY. *mm 97 (U.S.C.C.A.N.M.) Surety's obligation cannot be changed without his consent.-National Surety Co. v. State of New Mexico for Use and Benefit of Sandoval County, 16 F. (2d) 873. 50 (U.S.C.C.A.Ark.) In oil stock mail fraud case, instructions that good faith was no de-115(1) (U.S.C.C.A.Colo.) Relinquishment fense held not error (Criminal Code, §§ 37, 215 [Comp. St. §§ 10201, 10385]).-Nelson v. U. S., 16 F.(2d) 71. (A) Execution of Agency. 69(1) (U.S.C.C.A.Okl.) Agent, when dealing with principal, must disclose everything material in connection therewith.-Ingram v. Fidelity-Phoenix Fire Ins. Co. of New York, 16 F. (2d) 251. III. RIGHTS AND LIABILITIES AS TO THIRD PERSONS. (A) Powers of Agent. 115(1) (U.S.C.C.A.Okl.) Principal is bound by statement of agent within apparent scope of authority; "confectionery store purposes"; "general agent."-Daniel v. Pappas, 16 F. (2d) 880. Principal held estopped by statement and conduct of agent.-Id. (C) Unauthorized and Wrongful Acts. 156 (U.S.C.C.A.Tex.) Agent making false representations of existing fact to induce contract may be liable with principal for resulting damages.-Hidalgo County Water Improvement Dist. No. 4 v. Western Metal Mfg. Co., 16 F. (2d) 893. Agent's representations that, if iron irrigation siphon was constructed under manufacturer's supervision, it would stand any pressure, held to give no cause of action against agent, being promise for known principal.-Id. 161(2) (U.S.C.C.A.Ohio) Principal, after approving and accepting agent's acts, cannot repudiate some of the acts solely because he withheld from agent a nominal title.-U. S. v. A. Bentley & Sons Co., 16 F. (2d) 895. PRINCIPAL AND SURETY. See Indemnity. II. NATURE AND EXTENT OF LIABILITY OF SURETY. 60 (U.S.C.C.A.III.) Liability under bond executed in Minnesota by Minnesota corporation, involving local contract held controlled by of security by creditor discharges surety only to extent he is injured thereby.-Taylor v. Continental Supply Co., 16 F.(2d) 578. 123(3) (U.S.C.C.A.Md.) In absence of showing of damages, surety held not discharged by absence of notice of principal's default, not made condition of bond.-New Amsterdam Casualty Co. v. U. S. Shipping Board Emergency Fleet Corporation, to Use of U. S., 16 F.(2d) 847. PROHIBITION. See Intoxicating Liquors. PROMISSORY NOTES. See Bills and Notes. PROPERTY. 7 (U.S.C.C.A.La.) Possession is presumed to follow title.-Murphy v. Suir, 16 F. (2d) 269. PROSTITUTION. (U.S.C.C.A.Utah) No crime is committed unless interstate transportation of female was planned and made with immoral purpose (Comp. St. § 8813).-Drossos v. U. S., 16 F. (2d)` 833. Refusal to instruct acquittal, if accused intended in good faith to marry a married woman taken to another state before cohabiting with her, held error (Comp. St. § 8813).-Id. Instruction that accused must have had immoral intent when he secured tickets for transportation of woman in interstate commerce held correct (Comp. St. § 8813).-Id. 4 (U.S.C.C.A.Utah) Intent to transport female in interstate commerce for immoral purposes must be proved to jury beyond reasonable doubt (Comp. St. § 8813).-Drossos v. U. S., 16 F. (2d) 833. 65 (U.S.C.C.A.N.M.) Exclusion or inclusion in grants of lands to states in trust of provisions for expense of administration held not conclusive as to grant containing no expression thereon.-U. S. v. Swope, 16 F. (2d) 215. ment of expenses of management and sale of Provision of New Mexico statutes for paypublic lands held not in violation of trusts created by congressional grants (Code 1915, §§ 5183, 5184).—Id. (H) Grants in Aid of Railroads, 88 (1) (U.S.C.C.A.Utah) Government may sue to forfeit land grant for breach of condition subsequent.-U. S. v. Denver & R. G. W. R. Co., 16 F.(2d) 374. 92 (U.S.C.C.A.Cal.) Railroad cannot divest itself by sale or abandonment of portions of right of way granted by Congress (Act July 27, 1866, § 18 [14 Stat. 299]; Act March 3, 1871 [16 Stat. 573]).-Barnes v. Southern Pac. Co., 16 F. (2d) 100. For cases in Dec.Dig. & Am.Dig. Key-No.Series & Indexes see same topic and KEY-NUMBER Grant of right of way to railroad held absolute and in præsenti, and subsequent patentee took subject thereto (Act March 3, 1871 [16 Stat. 573]).--Id. 92 (U.S.C.C.A.Utah) United States held estopped to claim forfeiture of railroad right of way.-U. S. v. Denver & R. G. W. R. Co., 16 F. (2d) 374. PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSIONS. 7 (U.S.D.C.N.Y.) Value of public utility's property for rate purposes depends on peculiar facts of each case.-Brooklyn Borough Gas Co. v. Prendergast, 16 F. (2d) 615. Book cost, in confiscation rate case, is not decisive of value.-Id. Land not yet used, but reasonably acquired by public utility for future use, may be allowed as part of rate base.-Id. Cost of land, material, labor, and overheads must be considered for rate-making purposes. -Id. Going value of public utility must be considered for rate-making purposes.-Id. Value of public utility's property, and not reproduction cost, is ultimate basis of rates.-Id. PUBLIC SERVICE CORPORATIONS. See Carriers; Gas; Railroads; Street Railroads. QUIETING TITLE. II. PROCEEDINGS AND RELIEF. 44 (2) (U.S.C.C.A.Porto Rico) Bequest in will of record owner to brother, through whom plaintiffs claimed title to estate, held admissible. -Serralles v. Sucesion of Serralles, 16 F. (2d) 841. RAILROADS. See Street Railroads. I. CONTROL AND REGULATION IN 52 (U.S.D.C.Okl.) Claim for reparation on joint through rates is enforceable against Director General of Railroads (Federal Control Act [Comp. St. §§ 31154a-31154p]).-World Pub. Co. v. Davis, 16 F. (2d) 130. Director General of Railroads is liable for interest allowed on reparation award (Federal Control Act [Comp. St. §§ 31154a-31154p]). -Id. Director General of Railroads liable for costs in reparation proceeding (Interstate Commerce Act, § 16 [Comp. St. § 8584]).—Id. II. RAILROAD COMPANIES. 16 (U.S.C.C.A.Mich.) Under conceded facts, in action by minority stockholder in railroad against majority stockholder, held, plaintiff was under burden of proceeding to overcome inference of fairness.-Continental Securities Co. v. Michigan Cent. R. Co., 16 F. (2d) 378. Unfair treatment of railroad by majority stockholder, another railroad company, held not shown in minority stockholder's action.-Id. 33(2) (U.S.D.C.N.Y.) Foreign railroad soliciting business, having stock transfer agent, and deposits, held not subject to process as doing business within state (Const. Amend. 14, § 1).-Fowble v. Chesapeake & O. Ry. Co., 16 F. (2d) 504. V. RIGHT OF WAY AND OTHER INTERESTS IN LAND. Came63 (U.S.C.C.A.Colo.) Purchaser takes property subject to railroad's right to maintain tracks.-F. C. Ayres Mercantile Co. v. Union Pac. R. Co., 16 F.(2d) 395. Moving of spur tracks held not to interrupt running of prescriptive period nor impair rights.-Id. Maintenance of gates across spur track before adverse use began held not to prevent acquisition of easement by prescription.-Id. Evidence held to establish railroad's easement by prescription.-Id. VII. SALES, LEASES, TRAFFIC CON- 131 (U.S.C.C.A.Cal.) Railroad held authorized to lease its road to another company (St. Cal. 1880, p. 21).-Barnes v. Southern Pac. Co., 16 F. (2d) 100. 142 (U.S.C.C.A.III.) Consolidation contract between railroad bondholders' committee and terminal company held void for want of approval of Illinois Commerce Commission (Public Utilities Act Ill. § 27e).-Borg v. Illinois Terminal Co., 16 F. (2d) 988. Advance approval of consolidation contract between railroad bondholders' committee_and terminal company by Illinois Commerce Commission held required (Public Utilities Act Ill. § 27e).-Id. X. OPERATION. (A) Duty to Operate. 214 (U.S.D.C.Tex.) Interstate Commerce Commission cannot order abandonment of railroad engaged wholly in intrastate commerce.Brownwood North & South Ry. Co. v. Railroad Commission of Texas, 16 F. (2d) 297. Railroad charter does not oblige company to operate at loss.-Id. If loss is reasonably certain, railroad may cease operations in absence of contract.-Id. Railroad's acceptance of charter is not waiver of constitutional guaranties.-Id. That others have made improvements in expectation of continued operation does not result in implied obligation of railroad to operate.-Id. Individuals adversely affected by railroad's abandonment of operation have no cause of action for damages.-Id. Evidence of railroad's operating expenses and future prospects held to entitle it to abandon operation.-Id. REMOVAL OF CAUSES. II. ORIGIN, NATURE, AND SUBJECT OF CONTROVERSY. 21 (U.S.D.C.Mo.) Suit against federal receiver, arising out of his operation of property in his charge, held not removable (Judicial Code, § 33 [Comp. St. § 1015]).-Slover v. Chicago, M. & St. P. Ry. Co., 16 F. (2d) 609. III. CITIZENSHIP OR ALIENAGE OF (A) Diverse Citizenship or Alienage in General. 36 (U.S.C.C.A.Wyo.) It is not fraudulent to join tort-feasors, regardless of motive, as concerns removal of cause.-Kraus v. Chicago, B. & Q. R. Co., 16 F. (2d) 79. Pecuniary irresponsibility of resident defendant, or plaintiff's motive in joining him, is immaterial.-Id. Allegation that plaintiff did not intend to prosecute action to conclusion against resident defendant held not to warrant removal.-Id. Joinder of master and servant as defendants in personal injury action for servant's negligence held not fraudulent, where construction of local statute is uncertain (Comp. St. Wyo. 1920, § 5593).—Id. Joinder as defendants of those who cannot be joined under local law to prevent removal may be fraudulent.-Id. (B) Separable Controversies. 49(3) (U.S.D.C.Cal.) Under California law, cause of action against railroad and alleged negligent servant is separable.-Stephens v. Southern Pac. Co., 16 F. (2d) 288. VI. PROCEEDINGS TO PROCURE AND EF. FECT OF REMOVAL. 86(1) (U.S.C.C.A.Wyo.) Allegations of petition for removal, merely traversing facts in plaintiff's petition, are insufficient.-Kraus v. Chicago, B. & Q. R. Co., 16 F.(2d) 79. 86(2) (U.S.C.C.A.Wyo.) Allegations of petition for removal that parties were joined to prevent removal held bad, as conclusion.-Kraus v. Chicago, B. & Q. R. Co., 16 F. (2d) 79. RETROSPECTIVE LAWS. See Constitutional Law, 193; Statutes, 263. I. REQUISITES AND VALIDITY OF CONTRACT. 52 (5) (U.S.C.C.A.Ky.) Finding of difference between offer to buy on "basis fifteen cents Louisville" and offer to sell at "fifteen (cents) delivered Louisville" or "f. o. b. Louisville" held sustained by evidence.-American Smelting & Refining Co. v. Hyman, 16 F. (2d) 39. Binding agreement between defendant's broker and plaintiff held not established.-Id. II. CONSTRUCTION OF CONTRACT. 77(2) (U.S.C.C.A.Mass.) Contract for sale of sugar held to impose landing and lighterage charges on seller.-American Sugar Refining Co. V. Page & Shaw, 16 F. (2d) 662. 79 (U.S.C.C.A.N.Y.) Under sale contract against shipping documents f. o. b. Pacific Coast, buyer held entitled to reject bill of lading showing delivery in Texas.-Mitsubishi Goshi Kaisha v. J. Aron & Co., 16 F. (2d) 185. IV. PERFORMANCE OF CONTRACT. (C) Delivery and Acceptance of Goods. failure 176(3) (U.S.C.C.A.N.Y.) Buyer's to object to method of delivery may be deemed waiver thereof.-Higgins v. California Prune & Apricot Growers, 16 F. (2d) 190. 177 (U.S.C.C.A.N.Y.) Only absolute refusal to go on constitutes buyer's repudiation of contract.-Higgins v. California Prune & Apricot Growers, 16 F. (2d) 190. 178(4) (U.S.C.C.A.N.Y.) Buyer's letter, advising purchaser from it that certain car dominion over car, preventing refusal to accept would be applied on contract, held not exercise of it from original seller.-Mitsubishi Goshi Kaisha v. J. Aron & Co., 16 F. (2d) 185. V. OPERATION AND EFFECT. (A) Transfer of Title as Between Parties. 201(4) (U.S.C.C.A.Mass.) C. i. f. contract may require seller to make delivery at port of destination, without affecting passage of title at time of delivery to ship.-American Sugar Refining Co. v. Page & Shaw, 16 F. (2d) 662. 201(4) (U.S.C.C.A.N.Y.) On sale f. o. b. shipping point, title passed on seller's delivery to carrier.-Higgins v. California Prune & Apricot Growers, 16 F. (2d) 190. VI. WARRANTIES. 266 (U.S.D.C.Mass.) Seller held not to have impliedly warranted that boat engine would perform satisfactorily in respect to handling hoisting gear used in flounder dragging (Sales Act [G. L. Mass. c. 106, § 17]).-The E 270, 16 F. (2d) 1005. 287(1) (U.S.C.C.A.Wash.) Return of personal property sold under contract held not to constitute rescission precluding action for special damages for breach of warranty.-Clyde Equipment Co. v. Fiorito, 16 F.(2d) 106. VII. REMEDIES OF SELLER. 315 (U.S.C.C.A.N.Y.) Unpaid seller is entitled to recover purchase price on buyer's breach, where title has passed, and to resell under his lien (Personal Property Law N. Y. § 144 [as amended by Laws 1925, c. 560]).— Higgins v. California Prune & Apricot Growers, 16 F. (2d) 190. Buyer held entitled to credit for amount realized on resale after title passed to enforce seller's lien (Personal Property Law N. Y. § 141, and section 144, as amended by Laws 1925, c. 560).-Id. Seller must wait reasonable time before reselling to enforce his lien, where title has passed (Personal Property Law N. Y. § 141).-Id. Buyer's damages from seller's resale can only be asserted in separate action, or by counterclaim to seller's action for price (Personal Property Law N. Y. § 141, and section 144, as amended by Laws 1925, c. 560).-Id. Burden of proof is on buyer, claiming damages or seller's resale (Personal Property Law N. Y. $141, and section 144, as amended by Laws 1925, c. 560).—Id. Statute held to confer right on seller to resell, and not to impose duty (Personal Property Law N. Y. § 141, and section 144, as amended by Laws 1925, c. 560).—Id. |