« SebelumnyaLanjutkan »
LAW OF HIS RESIDENCE
| United States is entitled to priority, insolCode Civ. Proc. $ 390, provides that, vency laws are “laws of tbe states," although where a cause of action not involving real their operation is suspended by the bankestate within the state accrues against a non- ruptcy act. In re Bennett, 153 Fed. 673, 687, resident, an action cannot be brought there 82 C. C. A. 531 (citing In re Wright, 95 Fed. on in the state after the expiration of the 807). time limited by the “law of his residence" | The phrase "laws of the states," as used for bringing a like action. Held, that the in Bankr. Act July 1, 1898, providing for the phrase "law of his residence" means the law payment of debts owing to any person who, of the debtor's residence at the time the by the “laws of the states," or the United cause of action accrued, and not the time States, is entitled to priority, means that when the action was commenced. Utah Nat. 'the priorities must be determined by the laws Bank v. Jones, 96 N. Y. Supp. 338, 339, 109 of the particular state where the proceeding App. Div. 526.
is pending, and not by the laws of all the
states together. In re P. J. Potter's Sons, LAW OF THE LAND
143 Fed. 407, 411. See Due Process of Law.
A county ordinance regulating sheep LAW OF NECESSITY
grazing, and imposing a license tax thereon The “law of necessity," as applied to the "is a law of this state” within Pen. Code, s power to punish for contempt, is the law of 435, providing that every person commencing self-defense. People ex rel. Attorney Gen- or carrying on any business for which a lieral v. News-Times Pub. Co., 84 Pac. 912, cense is required by any “law of this state,” 967, 35 Colo. 253 (adopting definition in
without taking out or procuring the license Thomas, Constructive Contempt).
prescribed, is guilty of a misdemeanor. Plu
mas County v. Wheeler, 87 Pac. 909, 913, 149 LAW OF THE ROAD
Cal. 758; Sierra County v. Flanigan, 87 Pac. The custom of the road. and the law 913, 149 Cal. 769 (citing In re Lawrence, 11 founded on it, to go to the right of the cen- | Pac. 217, 69 Cal. 608). ter of the road in order to safely pass Municipal ordinances are “laws of the governs the case of vehicles passing on the state," within the provisions of Pen. Code, same side of the roads and streets so wide § 435, making it a misdemeanor for a perthat there is no necessity for them to turn 'son to carry on any calling for the transacto the right of the center line in order to tion of which a license is required by any pass safely. Wright v. Fleischman, 85 N. law of the state, without taking out or proY. Supp. 62, 41 Misc. Rep. 533.
curing the prescribed license. Ex parte
Sweetman, 90 Pac. 1069, 1070, 5 Cal. App. LAW OF THE STATE
577; Ex parte Bagshaw, 93 Pac. 864, 865, 152 The "laws of a state" are such enact- Cal. 701. ments as its Legislature promulgates, and as expounded by its courts, and a state stat- LAW STUDENT ute has such meaning as the judicial depart
See Student ment of the state construes it to have, though without such judicial construction the fed- LAW OF THE UNITED STATES eral courts might from its language construel Congressional enactments having generit differently. Commonwealth v. Interna-|
- al application throughout the United States, tional Harvester Co. of America, 115 S. W. and not the purely local laws of the District 703, 706, 131 Ky, 551, 133 Am. St. Rep. 256;
of Columbia, are what are meant by the American Tobacco Co. v. Commonwealth
provision of the Federal Judicial Code, $ (Ky.) 115 S. W. 755, 756.
250, for the appellate review in the Federal A provision in a note that the same shall Supreme Court of judgments and decrees of be construed by the “laws of the state" of the court of appeals of the District in cases Kansas means the statute of the state with in which the construction of "any law of reference to negotiable instrument and the the United States” is drawn in question by rights and liabilities of the parties thereto, the defendant. American Security & Trust and does not comprehend the decisions of Co. v. Commissioners of District of Columlocal courts construing like contracts that bia, 32 Sup. Ct. 553, 554, 224 U. S. 491, 56 had been or might thereafter be announced, L. Ed. 856. nor can it be expended so as to make the de- The phrase, “laws of the United States." cisions of the local courts the governing law as used in the removal acts, authorizing rewith respect to the construction of the pro-moval of a cause arising under the laws of visions of the mortgage given to secure such the United States, means acts of Congress, note. Keene Five Cent Sav. Bank v. Reid, and does not include executive rules and reg123 Fed. 221, 227, 59 C. C. A, 225.
ulations, unless a recovery of damages is Within the provision of Bankr. Act, s expressly authorized by statute for a disre 64b(5), giving priority to debts owing to any gard of such regulations. Beck v. Johnson, person who by the laws of the state or the 169 Fed. 154, 162.
The laws enacted by a territorial Legis- | 1015, 1019, 177 Mo. 699 (quoting with aplature, subject to disapproval by Congress, proval from State v. Bulling, 15 S. W. 367, are not "laws of the United States," and a 16 S. W. 830, 105 Mo. 204). suit arising under them, as where a corporation organized under them is a party to the LAWFUL ACT suit, does not arise under the laws of the
The words "lawful act," as used in Pen. United States, and a federal court has no Code 1895
Code 1895, § 684, providing that if any perjurisdiction on that ground. Maxwell v.
son in the performance of a lawful act shall Federal Gold & Copper Co., 155 Fed. 110, 112,
by negligence and carelessness cause the 83 C. C. A. 570.
death of another he is guilty of negligent
homicide of the first degree, is defined by LAWS, RULES, AND REGULATIONS
article 685 as an act not forbidden by the GOVERNING THE SOCIETY
penal law, and which would give no just A certificate in a mutual benefit associa
occasion for a civil action. Gorden v. State tion, requiring that members should comply
(Tex.) 90 S. W. 636, 637. with all “laws, rules, and regulations govern
ne society," or that might be thereafter LAWFUL AUTHORITY enacted for its government, related to bylaws enacted to control the internal manage
See Proper and Lawful Authority. ment of the association, and did not include Plaintiff's superintendent visited the a by-law by which the society attempted to land on which defendants were claimed to limit its liability on all outstanding certif- have committed a trespass in cutting timber, icates to an amount not exceeding one-half of and on each of the visits stopped at defendthe amount the association had contracted ants' camp. On his first visit the superinto pay on the death of members in good tendent pointed out the section or lot lines standing. Bornstein v. District Grand Lodge to the foreman of defendant company and No. 4 Independent Order B'nai B'rith, 84 requested him to keep an accurate account Pac. 271-275, 2 Cal. App. 624.
of all timber he might cut. A like request
was made of defendant S., who was presiLAWFUL
dent and general manager of defendant comSee Shall be Lawful.
pany. Held, sufficient to show that plaintiff See, also, Legal.
acquiesced in the cutting and removing of the Where plaintiffs alleged that, being the
timber, subject to defendants' accounting for owners of certain capital stock in defendant
its actual value, and that it was not cut company, they deposited it with the com without "lawful authority," within Rem. & pany, to be sold by defendant and the pro
Bal. Code, $ 939, authorizing a recovery of ceeds used in paying its debts, in considera
treble damages for the cutting of timber tion of an agreement that plaintiffs should
without lawful authority, etc. Lytle Loghold certain offices of defendant until its ging & Mercantile Co. v. Humptulips Driving business should be in successful operation, | Co., 111 Pac. 774, 775, 60 Wash. 559. that defendant violated its agreement and ejected plaintiffs from the offices, and had
LAWFUL BENEFICIARY sold and issued the stock to others, and The word "lawful," as used in a benefit refused and failed to deliver it to plaintiffs, certificate, providing that the beneficial asor to pay plaintiff's the value thereof, though sociation would pay to the beneficiary a cerrequested to do so, there could be no recov- tain sum of money, provided he was the ery as on a contract, as the alleged contract "lawful” beneficiary of the member at the was illegal under Civ. Code, & 431, requiring time of his death, means, according to the directors of a corporation to be elected an- laws of the beneficial association, that plainnually by the stockholders or members, and tiff should be at the time of the member's section 2240, declaring that which is con- death within the order of family relationtrary to an express provision of the law ship to the beneficiary mentioned in the charnot “lawful." Glass v. Basin & Bay State ter. Davin v. Davin, 99 N. Y. Supp. 1012, Min. Co., 77 Pac. 302, 304, 31 Mont. 21.
1014, 114 App. Div. 396. Legal, adequate, and reasonable syn
LAWFUL BUSINESS onymous
In speaking of the provocation neces In Business Corporations Law, § 2, ausary to arouse the heat of passion, which thorizing the formation of stock corporations would result in reducing the crime to man for any lawful business, "lawful business" slaughter, “this court has held that 'lawful,' means one lawful to all who engage in it and 'legal,' 'adequate,' and 'reasonable,' when does not include the business of practicing used as adjectives qualifying 'provocation,' law; the right to practice law being in the are synonyms; and, as a general rule, with nature of a franchise from the state confervery few exceptions, it takes an assault or red only for merit. In re Co-operative Law personal violence to constitute this provoca- Co., 92 N. E. 15, 16, 198 N. Y. 479, 32 L. R. A. tion." State y. Heath, 121 S. W. 149, 154, (N. S.) 55, 139 Am. St. Rep. 839, 19 Ann. Cas. 221 Mo. 565; State v. McKenzie, 76 S. W.879.
| being sufficiently broad to include gold and Where the punishment inflicted by a par- silver, as well as paper money. Brittain v. ent on a child is so excessive and cruel as State, 105 S. W. 817, 819, 820, 52 Tex, Cr. R. to show that the parent was not acting in good faith for the benefit of the child, the Under a statute providing that in an inparent is guilty of an unlawful assault, and dictment for the larceny of money it is sufcannot justify his act by claiming that the ticient to allege the larceny of the same, withpunishment inflicted was a "lawful chastise- out specifying the denomination or kind therement" ; but so long as a parent acts in good of, an indictment, charging accused with stealfaith, honestly thinking that what he does is ing money "lawful currency of the realm” for the benefit of the child, he is within his (i. e., of the United States), to the amount prerogative, and the law will not interfere. and value of $20 or more, sufficiently deState v. Koonse, 101 S. W. 139, 141, 123 Mo. scribes the money, to constitute larceny, App. 655.
within Ky. St. 1903, § 1194, punishing lar
ceny of money of the value of $20 or more. LAWFUL CHILD
Todd v. Com. (Ky.) 93 S. W. 631, 632 (citing Where a will provided that the property Commonwealth v. Mann (Ky.) 14 S. W. 685 : given to one of the devisees should, if he Jones v. Commonwealth, 13 Busb [76 Ky.) died without lawful children, go to the heirs 356; Travis y. Commonwealth, 27 S. W. 863, of another devisee, an adopted child of the
96 Ky. 77). devisee first mentioned was not a “lawful child,” within the meaning of the will. Coch
Where a theft is charged, and the alleran v. Cochran, 95 S. W. 731, 732, 43 Tex.
gation is general that the money taken was Civ. App. 259.
lawful current money of the United States,
the evidence must show that it was legal LAWFUL CLAIM
tender coin or legal tender currency of the A good faith claim, appearing to be for- United States, and the nickel is legal tender midable and founded on grounds having the under the provisions of U. S. Comp. St. 1901, appearance, though false, of a paramount p. 2349. Black v. State, 79 S. W. 311, 46 title, is not covered by a warranty against | Tex. Cr. R. 107. lawful claims, but such a warranty is intended to cover real claims and not claims
LAWFUL DEBT only appearing real. An outstanding legal | “A 'debt is defined as 'that which is due title is within a covenant of warranty against from one person to another, whether money, "lawful claims," and if asserted, is a "law- goods, or services; that which one person ful claim," though an eviction may be avoid is bound to pay to or to perform for another, ed by showing a superior equity. Mackenzie that which one is obliged to do, or suffer.'» v. Clement, 129 S. W. 730, 731, 144 Mo. App. Plaintiff's husband gave his bond for the pay114.
ment of money, secured by a mortgage on
his farm, in which plaintiff joined. The LAWFUL COURSE
husband died, devising the farm to plaintiff, A bond recited that plaintiff lumber and who deeded it to her son, who assumed and oil company had a claim on certain timber agreed to pay the mortgage, but failed to in litigation which had been attached in a do so.' On the death of the son, without iscertain suit against the S. Lumber Company, sue, his widow, having a dower in trust in and provided that in consideration of the re- the farm, executed a quitclaim deed of it to lease of the attachments, and that plaintiff plaintiff and the other heirs, subject to dewould not litigate its rights in such suit, the cedent's “lawful debts,” which plaintiff asobligors bound themselves to pay any inter- sumed and agreed to pay. Held that, since est which plaintiff might have in the timber plaintiff did not sign the bond and was not to be determined by any lawful course. personally liable for the mortgage debt, the Held, that a lawful course for determining covenant of her son to pay it was not enplaintiff's interest was by suit on the bond ; | forceable against him, and hence the coveplaintiff not being required to establish first nant in the deed from his widow to plaintiff its interest in the timber by suit against the did not obligate plaintiff to pay the debt; a S. Lumber Company. Camp v. Capital Min-claim not enforceable at law not being a ing, Lumber & Oil Co. (Ky.) 128 S. W. 323, "lawful debt.” Bonhoff v. Wiehorst, 108 N. 324.
Y. Supp. 437, 441, 57 Misc. Rep. 456 (quoting
and adopting definition in Imp. Dict.; citing LAWFUL CURRENCY
Latimer v. Veader, 46 N. Y. Supp. 823, 20 See Lawful Money.
App. Div. 426). An indictment charging theft from the person of “two dollars in money, lawful cur- (LAWFUL DEFENSE rency of the United States of America and By the words "lawful defense of the perof the value of two dollars," was sustained son" is meant what is sometimes termed by proof of the theft of two dollars in silver; self-defense. Robinson v. Territory, 85 Pac. the term "currency," or "lawful currency," " 451, 455, 16 Okl. 241.
| LAWFUL FENCE In Rev. St. § 5451, which makes it a See, also, Legal and Sufficient Fence. criminal offense to give or offer bribes, etc., A fence, posts of which are rotted off, is to induce any officer of, or person acting for not a lawful fence within Rev. St. 1899, Š or on behalf of, the United States in any offi- 3295, providing that in a county where swine cial function to do or omit to do any act in are restrained from running at large a fence violation of his lawful duty, the phrase "law- composed of three barbed wires, stretched ful duty” is not restricted to a duty imposed on posts, firmly set in the ground, not more by statute, but is broad enough to cover a than 16 feet apart, shall be a lawful fence. duty imposed by a lawful superior; and an Smith v. Chicago & A. Ry. Co., 105 S. W. 10, indictment charging a conspiracy to induce 12, 127 Mo. App. 160. an assistant statistician in the Department
Under Rev. St. 1899, Š 1105, requiring of Agriculture to furnish to the accused ad
a railroad company to construct and mainvance news of crop conditions, and to cause
tain fences sufficient to prevent stock getting to be published false reports as to such con
on the track, an instruction, in an action ditions in violation of the rules of the depart
under such section for injuries to stock, ment, to aid defendants in market specula
which defined a lawful fence as one sufficient tions, by promising such employé a percent
"to resist horses, cattle, swine, and like age of the profits of such speculations, charg
stock,” was not erroneous for using the es a conspiracy to commit an offense against
phrase "to resist”; such phrase not being as the United States under Rev. St. $ 5440.
strong as the phrase "to prevent" in the United States v. Haas, 163 Fed. 908, 910.
statute. Hax v. Quincy, O. & K. C. R. Co., Regulations of the Agricultural Depart- 100 S. W. 693, 695, 123 Mo. App. 172. ment having forbidden the giving out of any | Rev. St. 1899. & 3295. providing for the statement relating to the business of the de- construction of fences sufficient to prevent partment without the approval of the chief
swine from running at large, composed of of the bureau, and secrecy having been im wire 4 feet high and posts 16 feet apart, reposed on all employés by the established us
ferred to outside fences other than those reage and practice, indictments charging bri
quired of railroads, so that a fence conformbery of an associate statistician of the Bureau
ing to such specifications, constructed by an of Statistics of the Department of Agricul.
| adjoining landowner along a railroad right ture to divulge the contents of the current of way, did not constitute a "lawful fence,” cotton crop report in advance of its official for the building of which the landowner publication stated an offense under Rev. St.
could recover from the railroad under Rev. § 5451, making it a crime to bribe any per- St. 1899, Š 1105 (Ann. St. 1906, p. 945). Sharp son acting for the United States in any offi- v. Quincy, O. & K. C. Ry. Co., 123 S. W. cial function to do or commit any act in vio
507, 508, 139 Mo. App. 525. lation of his lawful duty. Haas v. Henkel,
The petition in an action for damages to 166 Fed. 621, 627.
growing crops from trespassing stock alleged
that the premises were situated in a subdiviLAWFUL ENTRY
sion where hogs, etc., were prohibited from The expression that the "entry must be
running at large, and were inclosed by a lawlawful" means, not that it must have been
ful fence under the statute when the treseffected under a formal right capable of en
passes occurred, and described the stock law forcement by legal proceedings, but that it district by metes and bounds, and further almust not be through any unlawful or wrong-leged that, in the event that plaintiff's fence ful act, upon which the mortgagee would be
was not in strict compliance with the statute, estopped to found a right. Stouffer v. Har
nevertheless it was sufficient to keep out all lan, 74 Pac. 610, 613, 68 Kan. 135, 64 L. R. stock sought to be excluded of an ordinary A. 320, 104 Am. St. Rep. 396.
disposition, and not of a fence-breaking na
ture. Held, that the petition alleged a comLAWFUL EXCUSE
mon-law liability based on the stock owner's That provision for alimony made by a negligence in knowingly permitting vicious Nevada court is not enforceable against the
animals to run at large, as well as the statuhusband, a reşident of California, because no
tory liability based upon plaintiff's mainjurisdiction of his person was acquired, does
tenance of a "lawful fence," within the statnot constitute a lawful excuse within Pen.
ute. Posey v. Coleman (Tex.) 133 S. W. 937, Code, $ 270, which makes it an offense for
Sayles' Ann. Civ. St. 1897, art. 2496, rea parent to willfully omit without lawful excuse to furnish necessary food, etc., for his
quires every farmer, etc., to make a sufficient
fence at least five feet high, which shall be child. Ex parte McMullin, 126 Pac. 368, 370,
hog-tight, around his cleared land. Article 19 Cal. App. 481.
2497 permits one injured by the trespass of
cattle or other stock to complain to a justice LAW EXPENSES
of the peace, who shall appoint two freeOther lawful expenses, see Other. | holders to ascertain the sufficiency of the
fence and the damages, and, if it appears that descriptive of the whole line of lawful heirs.
intention not to use the word "heirs" in its
ordinary legal sense as a word of inheritance
or of limitation. Wool V. Fleetwood, 48
4998, S. E. 785, 789, 136 N. C. 460, 67 L. R. A. 444.
The words "lawful heirs," as used in a
the running at large will whereby the testator bequeathed his
residuary estate to his lawful heirs, without
other or further designation as to who are in-
tended as his beneficiaries, and directed that
the same should be equally divided among
his lawful heirs, share and share alike, de-
scribed all the persons who, at the time of
the death of the testator, answered the de-
scription of lawful heirs and were entitled
to share in the residuary estate, regardless
of the degree of their relationship to the tes-
tator, and resort must be had to the statute
in order to determine who were the legal
u heirs of the testator. Mooney y. Purpus, 70
N. E. 894, 895, 70 Ohio St. 57.
In common parlance, the terms "heirs at
law" and "lawful heirs" are used indiscrim-
inately as synonymous and convertible terms,
and, whenever either is used, they invariably
refer to the heirs on whom descent is cast by
law, and not to an heir by adoption. The
relation of an heir by adoption is an excep-
tional and unusual one, and does not come
within the ordinary and usual meaning of the
words "lawful heirs, and those words ought
A devise to the testator's “lawful heirs"
should be construed as referring to those who
will. Hill v. Hill, 132 N. W. 738, 739, 90
Neb, 43, 38 L. R. A. (N. s.) 198.
A devise of land to testator's children,
subject to the provision that the share of
any child dying without issue of his body
shall descend to the survivors of the chil-
dren, or the lawful heirs surviving any of
| the children, gives to the children an estate
grandchildren surviving any of the children;