23(1) (Wash.) A railroad, which, though aggrieved by only part of a judgment, by appealing from the whole thereof, on affirmance had judgment directed against it on its supersedeas bond for the entire judgment appealed from, See Banks and Banking, 40; Corporations, was entitled to be subrogated, upon payment of 76-121, 377. the judgment, to the rights of plaintiff in his judgment against the other defendants.-Simmons v. Northern Pac. Ry. Co., 155 P. 1039. SUBSCRIPTIONS. See Corporations, 76, 78. 6 (Idaho) The phrase "moving picture show," within Rev. Codes, § 6825, as amended by Laws 1911, p. 342, prohibiting moving picmotion pictures are exhibited for public amuseture shows on Sunday, means a place where P. 296. ment and entertainment.-State v. Morris, 155 p. 342, forbidding moving picture shows on SunRev. Codes, § 6825, as amended by Laws 1911, day, does not prohibit the use of moving pictures on Sunday to illustrate a religious lecture or sermon.-Id. SUPERSEDEAS. See Appeal and Error, 465, 470, 1225, 1236; SUPPORT. 103 (Cal.) After a motorman has passed a pedestrian on a street crossing in safety with See Parent and Child, 17. the front end of his car, he cannot be held to have knowledge of any danger she assumed by changing her position.-Wood v. Los Angeles Ry. Corp., 155 P. 68. SURETYSHIP. See Principal and Surety. SURGEONS. 113 (Cal.) In a pedestrian's action against a street railroad company for injuries by being struck by a car, testimony of traffic officer as to the right of way of another vehicle held imma- See Physicians and Surgeons. terial.-Wood v. Los Angeles Ry. Corp., 155 P. 68. 118 (Cal.) In a pedestrian's action against SURPRISE. a street railroad company for injuries by be- See New Trial, 97. you find * * * that the SURVIVORSHIP. TAXATION. any danger to said plaintiff," etc., held not to See Homestead, 134–144. In a pedestrian's action against a street railroad company for injuries by being struck by See Commerce, 73; Drains, 67-82; Li408-508, School Dis121. I. NATURE AND EXTENT OF POWER | structive fraud, held a question of fact.-HeusIN GENERAL. ! (Wash.) A "tax" is a thing general in its application, a charge upon the persons or property or classes of property, so that the penalty provided by the Red Light Law being put on property in gross and not according to its value cannot be regarded as a deterrent tax-State v. Emerson, 155 P. 579. II. CONSTITUTIONAL REQUIRE- 38 (Mont.) Workmen's Compensation Act, though it will require counties to levy taxes to pay compensation to injured workmen is not in violation of Const. art. 12, § 11, relating to taxation for public purposes only.-Lewis and Clark County v. Industrial Acc. Board of Montana, 155 P. 268. ton v. King County, 155 P. 773. den of showing excessive valuation by evidence Party suing to reduce taxes held to have burof the most clear and convincing character.-Id. In action to reduce taxes, testimony as to in favor of valuation of assessor so as to make overvaluation held not to overcome presumption judgment of dismissal erroneous.-Id. VII. PAYMENT AND REFUNDING OR 516 (Okl.) Under Sess. Laws 1910, c. 73, § 40 (Kan.) That portion of Laws 1913, 200, § 8, imposing a fee of 10 cents per barrel for inspection of petroleum products, held to prescribe a fee grossly in excess of the amount necessary to administration of the act and to be violative of Const. art. 11, § 1, requiring a uniform and equal rate of assessment.-State v. Cumiskey, 155 P. 47. 44 (Kan.) Laws 1907, c. 409, relative to county tax levies, held not invalid on the ground that the classifications of counties are unreasonable, without substantial basis.-Atchison, T. & S. F. Ry. Co. v. Board of Com'rs of Cowley County, 155 P. 18. In action to recover back taxes, testimony as to overvaluation held not to overcome presumption in favor of valuation of assessor so as to make judgment of dismissal erroneous.-Id. VIII. COLLECTION AND ENFORCEMENT AGAINST PERSONS OR PERSONAL PROPERTY. (C) Remedies for Wrongful Enforcement. 611(8) (Kan.) A judgment, enjoining a county treasurer, under Code Civ. Proc. § 265 (Gen. St. 1909, § 5859), from collecting a tax levied under an assessed valuation fixed by the State Tax Commission, is binding on the Commission. -State v. Klinginsmith, 155 P. 945. IX. SALE OF LAND FOR NONPAYMENT OF TAX. 679(7) (Cal.) Under Pol. Code, § 3897, providing that no bid for land sold to the state for the amount of taxes, costs, and penalties, and taxes shall be received or accepted for less than expenses, a sale of land for $35.22 was invalid where the notice of sale stated that the total amount due for taxes, interest, and advertising was $40.22.-Jordan v. Beale, 155 P. 990. 687 (Wash.) Rem. & Bal. Code, § 9262, requiring purchasers of certificates of delinquency to pay all taxes accruing after issuance of certificate, or any prior taxes remaining due or unpaid, but excepting counties and municipalities, does not require counties to pay to such holders the amount paid by them for taxes.-Whatcom County v. Black, 155 P. 1071. The holder of a tax lien certificate in order to preserve his rights must pay the taxes each year as they accrue until foreclosure and ultimate title is acquired by him.-Id, X. REDEMPTION FROM TAX SALE. 697 (Okl.) The phrase "belonging to them," within Comp. Laws 1909, § 7649, providing for redemption by a minor of lands sold at a tax sale, includes the interest of a minor who at time of the sale was a mortgagee of the lands sold.-Blaine County Bank v. Noble, 155 P. 532. 708 (1) (Wash.) Since the lien of taxes is prior in inverse order to other tax liens, the foreclosure of a tax lien for the taxes of one year wipes out all delinquent taxes for prior years.-Whatcom County v. Black, 155 P. 1071. 708(4) (Wash.) Under Rem. & Bal. Code, § 9257, providing for foreclosure of tax liens, it is not necessary, to give the court jurisdiction to foreclose the lien for delinquent taxes, that the defendants have personal service.-Whatcom County v. Black, 155 P. 1071. XI. TAX TITLES. (A) Title and Rights of Purchaser at Tax Sale. 734 (Okl.) A tax sale of land at a time other than that provided by the law in force (Laws 1909, c. 38, art. 9, § 19) held void.-Blaine County Bank v. Noble, 155 P. 532. (C) Actions to Confirm or Try Title. 796(3) (Cal.) Under Pol. Code, §§ 3780, 3817, giving the owner of land sold for taxes the right to redeem until the state has disposed of the land, the person liable for a tax on land may complain of the invalidity of a sale by the state as violative of section 3897, regulating amount of bids.-Jordan v. Beale, 155 P. 990. ant in common.-McGinley v. Cannon, 155 P. 1047. 38(8) (Wash.) Evidence, in action to establish interest in realty and for an accounting for rents, held to sustain referee's finding that plaintiff's partner and cotenant had held it under terms of a lease purchased from a tenant, so as to be liable for rent provided in original lease.-McGinley v. Cannon, 155 P. 1047. III. RIGHTS AND LIABILITIES OF 41 (Cal.) A tenant in common cannot create 799 (Kan.) Where a person claiming realty under title from the government has held verse possession for more than 20 years, he may quiet his title against a claimant under tax deeds more than 2 years old, who has commenced no proceeding to obtain possession.Fontron v. Bentley, 155 P. 933. XII. FORFEITURES AND PENALTIES. 840 (Okl.) Under Sess. Laws 1910, c. 73, § 2, as amended by Sess. Laws 1910-1911, c. 120, § 1, the county treasurer should mail notice to each taxpayer of the amount of his taxes and when same will become due and delinquent and of the penalty for delinquency.-City Nat. Bank of Madill v. Gayle, 155 P. 552. It is not the knowledge of the amount of tax TENDER. See Costs, 42; Specific Performance, 96; Vendor and Purchaser, 148. TERMS. See Landlord and Tenant, 79-110. TESTAMENTARY CAPACITY. es. but the giving of notice under Sess. Laws See Wills, 25. 1911, c. 73, § 2, as amended by Sess. Laws 1910-1911, c. 120. § 1, that permits collection THEATERS AND SHOWS. of the penalty and determines the delinquency See Constitutional Law, 84; Sunday, ~~6. of taxes.-Id. TELEGRAPHS AND TELEPHONES. See Evidence, 9, 148. II. REGULATION AND OPERATION. 262 [New, vol. 17 Key-No. Series] (Okl.) Const. art. 9, § 5, places under the jurisdiction of the Corporation Commission only such telephone lines as are operated for hire, and not rural lines operated on the mutual plan without charges or toll.-Limestone Rural Telephone Co. v. Best, 155 P. 901. 6 (Cal.App.) Proprietor of amusement park held not relieved of liability for injuries by fact that accident was due to negligence of concessioners or their employés.-Whyte v. Idora Park Co., 155 P. 1018. Judgment for injuries against proprietor of amusement park held not to be reversed, even if its liability depended on defective construction or likelihood of device causing injury, in view of the evidence.-Id. Whether one visiting amusement park assumed risk of injury in using slideway or chute upon assurances of attendant held a question of fact.-Id. THEFT. 28 (Wash.) Public Service Commission, ordering physical connection between two telephone lines, has no authority in the first instance to make rules to prevent interference See Larceny. with the lines of a third company using the lines of one of the two companies.-State v. Skagit River Telephone & Telegraph Co., 1555 (N.M.) An indictment under Code 1915, P. 144. THREATS. § 1584, must allege that defendant not only ma33 (Wash.) Under the statute, Public Serv-liciously threatened injury to the person or propice Commission may not establish joint rates where telephone companies make physical connection until the companies have failed so to do.-State v. Skagit River Telephone & Telegraph Co., 155 P. 144. TELEPHONE CONVERSATIONS. See Evidence, 148. TENANCY IN COMMON. II. MUTUAL RIGHTS, DUTIES, AND 15 (Utah) In suit to quiet title, plaintiff's acts held to create title by adverse possession against cotenant.-Mathews v. Baker, 155 P. 427. erty of another, but that the threat was with intent to extort money or pecuniary advantage or to compel the person threatened to act against his will.-State v. Strickland, 155 P. 719. TIME. See Appeal and Error, 228, 272, 338, 356, 537, 564, 567, 623, 628, 773; Criminal Law, 279, 1069; Execution, 75; Garnishment, 141; Indictment and Information, 139; Pleading, 85; Specific Performance. 93; Trial, 257; Vendor and Purchaser, 75, 119. 9 (Okl.) Where the court allowed 60 days from May 15th to serve case-made, case-made served July 15th was too late.-Barger-Adams Co. v. Walker Bros., 155 P. 587. Actual notice of exclusive claim is not necessary to title by adverse possession against cotenants, notice by conduct being sufficient.-Id.10 (Or.) Under L. O. L. § 550, as amended 28(1) (Wash.) By agreement, one cotenant may become the tenant of the other of his part of the estate, in which case such cotenant holds under the terms of the lease and not as a ten by Laws 1913, p. 617, an appeal became perfected with the expiration of Monday when the fifth day after the filing of the undertaking on appeal fell on Sunday.-Cauldwell v. Bingham & Shelley Co., 155 P. 190. TITLE. notice of trial given to defendant by postal card held insufficient.-McMunn v. Lehrke, 155 P. 473. III. COURSE AND CONDUCT OF See Abstracts of Title; Adverse Possession; Chattel Mortgages, 17; Descent and Distribution, 75; Ejectment, 9, 95; Injunction, 39; Insurance, 328; Judgment, 779; Landlord and Tenant, 66; 21 (Cal.App.) Under Code Civ. Proc. $$ Quieting Title; Taxation, 734-799. 284-286, trial court, in absence of written notice requiring defendant to appoint another attorney after his original attorney has ceased to act, and in absence of defendant or any attorney, held without authority to proceed with the trial.-McMunn v. Lehrke, 155 P. 473. ~25 (Okl.) Defendant, having the burden of proof, is entitled to open and close.-Congdon v. McAlester Carriage & Wagon Factory, 155 P. 597. Where the pleadings do not disclose the exact amount plaintiff is entitled to, defendant, before being entitled to open and close the argument, should admit such amount in open court.-Id. Where defendant failed, until after opening statements were made and introduction of some evidence, to claim his right to open and close the argument, the question of granting or refusing his request rested in the court's discretion.-Id. 25 (Okl.) Under Comp. Laws 1909, § 5794, the party not having the burden of proof must make his statement immediately after that of the adverse party unless the court for special reason otherwise directs.-Kali Inla Coal Co. v. Ghinelli, 155 P. 606. See Appeal and Error, 612; Criminal Law, 31 (Okl.) The right to open and close the 1105. argument will be deemed waived in the absence of a timely request.-Congdon v. McAlester Carriage & Wagon Factory, 155 P. 597. IV. RECEPTION OF EVIDENCE. (A) Introduction, Offer, and Admission of Evidence in General. 48 (Utah) Although the reply to a notice to a landowner to protect his walls on account of excavations contained immaterial and selfserving statements, it was not error to admit it with the restriction that the jury should con sider the notice, and not the facts stated.-Murray Meat & Livestock Co. v. Newhouse Realty Co., 155 P. 442. (B) Order of Proof, Rebuttal, and Reopening Case. 45 (Kan.) Where, in an action under Gen. St. 1909, § 9692, for treble damages for destruction of trees, plaintiff elects to recover the dis-59 (Okl.) Defendant, having the burden of tinct value of the trees, it is error to admit de- proof, is entitled to first produce his testimony. fendant's proof that the land would sell for -Congdon v. McAlester Carriage & Wagon Facas much or more for farming purposes without tory, 155 P. 597. the trees as with them.-Collins v. Morris, 155 P. 51. (D) Damages. Where defendant failed, until after opening statements were made and introduction of some evidence, to claim his right to submit his evidence first, the question of granting or refusing his request rested in the court's discretion.--Id. V. ARGUMENTS AND CONDUCT OF 55 (Kan.) In trespass to land contention that the owner should have used his land for a particular purpose, or that it could be most profitably employed for a particular purpose, cannot affect the extent of his liability for injury to the property.-Collins v. Morris, 155109 (Okl.) A distinct and formal oral adP. 51. mission of a material fact made in the opening statement to dispense with proof is conclusive on the party making same, but an alleged admission of doubtful meaning is not conclusive, especially where nullified by other statements.Patterson v. Morgan, 155 P. 694. Where the opening statement of counsel is not a solemn admission of some controverted question of fact, it is error to instruct that it contains a conclusive admission; the question being for the jury.-Id. 121(4) (Wash.) Refusal of court to permit counsel to comment on failure of a nonresident defendant, though present as a witness, to appear and defend, where he was not properly served with process, as affecting his credibility as a witness, heid proper.-Calhoun, Denny & Ewing v. Whitcomb, 155 P. 759. |