« SebelumnyaLanjutkan »
For cases in Dec.Dig, & Am.Dig. Key-No.Series & Indexes see same topic and KEY-NUMBER ing out ship with privity or knowledge of insuf- ters of opinion.-Orenstein r. Star Ins. Co. of ficiency.-Id.
America, 10 F.(20) 754.
555 (U.S.C.C.A.S.C.) Insured held not esX. FORFEITURE OF POLICY FOR BREACH
topped to contest for false swearing in proofs OF PROMISSORY WARRANTY, COVE
of loss, because of intention when taking nonNANT', OR CONDITION SUBSEQUENT.
waiver agreement to contest for increased haz(A) Grounds in General.
ard.--Orenstein v. Star Ins. Co. of America, 311(3) (U.S.C.C.A.S.C.) Mere open loss 10 F.(20) 754. payable clause does not save appointee against 559(1) (U.S.C.C.A.S.C.) Breach of condidefenses of breach of increased hazard and tion against false swearing is not waived by false swearing clauses, available against in- denial of liability if proofs of loss containing sured.-Orenstein v. Star Ins. Co. of America, such swearing are in fact offered.-Orenstein v. 10 F.(20) 754.
Star Ins. Co. of America, 10 F.(20) 754. Mortgage interest clause in policy held not to exclude conditions of policy as against mort
XVIII. ACTIONS ON POLICIES. gagee, unless so stated in rider containing loss 626 (U.S.C.C.A.N.Y.) Complaint held suffipayable clause.-Id.
cient to authorize service on president or
treasurer as officer of unincorporated associaXI. ESTOPPEL, WAIVER, OR AGREE
tion (General Associations Law [Consol. Laws MENTS AFFECTING RIGHT TO AVOID
N. Y. c. 29) § 13).-Bobe v. Lloyds, 10 F.(20) OR FORFEIT POLICY.
730. 395 (U.S.C.C.A.S.C.) Insurer, in view of Services of process on corporation acting as prior nonwaiver agreement, held not to have treasurer for insurance underwriting syndicates waived defense of increase of hazard by not held to give court jurisdiction (General Associdenying liability when rejecting proofs as ations Law [Consol. Laws N. Y. c. 29) § 13; not correctly stating loss.-Orenstein v. Star Civil Practice Act N. Y. & 229).-Id. Ins. Co. of America, 10 F.(20) 754.
640(2) (U.S.C.C.A.Wash.) Breach of conOmw 400 (U.S.C.C.A.Miss.) Denial of liability dition or warranty in policy is affirmative deunder double indemnity clause, because of ex- fense, required to be pleaded.-National Liberty ception thereto, held not contest of policy, with. Ins. Co. of America v. Milligan, 10 F.(20) 483. in meaning of contestability clause.-Sanders v. Om645(3) (U.S.C.C.A.Wash.) Defenses in acJefferson Standard Life Ins. Co., 10 F.(20) 143. tion on oral contract of fire insurance held not
Incontestability clause does not prevent ques- available for want of pleading.–National Libertioning extent of coverage.-Id.
ty Ins. Co. of America v. Milligan, 10 F.(20) mm 400 (U.S.D.C.Mo.) Insurer's mere
denial 483. of liability is not contest of policy, within mean- Om645(5) (U.S.C.C.A.Wash.) Pleadings and ing of incontestable clause.-Lincoln Nat. Life proof, in action on oral contract of insurance, Ins. Co. v. Peake, 10 F.(20) 366.
held not at fatal variance.-National Liberty
Ins. Co. of America v. Milligan. 10 F.(20) 483. XII. RISKS AND CAUSES OF LOSS.
On 665(3) (U.S.C.C.A.S.C.) Evidence held suf(A) Marine Insurance.
ficient to sustain finding of breach of condiw403 (U.S.C.C.A.Wash.) Overturning of tion against increase of hazard.-Orenstein v. vessel held "peril of the sea,” within policy - Star Ins. Co. of America, 10 F.(20) 754. Olympia Canning Co. v. Union Marine Ins. Co., Em668(3) (U.S.C.C.A.Pa.) Where facts 10 F.(20) 72.
undisputed, court should construe policy, and
decide if it applies.-Wright v. Ætna Life Ins. (E) Accident and Health Insurance. Co., 10 F.(20) 281. 455 (U.S.C.C.A.Tex.) Death in encounter
INTEREST. of insured, if innocent of aggression, or if he could not reasonably anticipate injury from his I. RIGHTS AND LIABILITIES IN GENERAL. aggression, held "accidental.”—Occidental Life, Ins. Co. v. Holcomb, 10 F.(20) 125.
Oml(U.S.C.C.A.Tex.) _"Interest" defined. Death of aggressor, who knew or should have Kishi v. Humble Oil & Refining Co., 10 F.(20)
356. anticipated possibility of death in encounter, held in (U.S.C.C.A.Tex.) A stakeholder, retainnot accidental.-Id.
ing money, is liable for interest.-Kishi v. XIJI. EXTENT OF LOSS AND LIABILITY
Humble Oil & Refining Co., 10 F.(20) 356.
www 13 (U.S.C.C.A.Tex.) Interest on oil royal
ties held recoverable on establishing right there(B) Insurance of Property and Titles.
to.-Kishi v. Humble Oil & Refining Co., 10 500 (U.S.C.C.A.Tenn.) Policies of insur- F.(20) 356. ance on use and occupancy of mill held open, and not valued; "not exceeding.”-Stuyvesant Ins.
INTERNAL REVENUE, Co. v. Jacksonville Oil Mill, 10 F.(2d) 54.
2 (U.S.D.C.Neb.) Tax graduated on value (E) Accident and Health Insurance. of interest of surviving spouse held to violate
constitutional limitation on power of Congress 527 (U.S.C.C.A.Pa.) Automobile rider, at
to lay direct taxes.-Munroe v. U. S., 10 F. tached to policy covering injuries to assured
(2d) 230. "while riding in” car, construed.-Wright v.
Om2 (U.S.D.C.N.Y.) Gift tax held a direct Ætna Life Ins. Co., 10 F.(20) 281. ww529 (U.S.C.C.A.Tex.) Insured's
tax, invalid for want of apportionment (Revdeath in
enue Act June 2, 1924, § 319 [Comp. St. Supp. encounter held not accidental, within double benefit provision of life policy.-Occidental Life Ins. McNeir v. Anderson, 10 F.(20) 613.
1925, § 633648); Const. art. 1, § 2, cl. 3).Co. v. Holcomb, 10 F.(20) 125.
On7 (U.S.C.C.AJII.) Compensation of real esXIV. NOTICE AND PROOF OF LOSS.
tate expert in condemnation proceedings by
city held not exempt from income tax, as money Om553(1) (U.S.C.C.A.Mich.) Absolute person- received for services as instrumentality of state al knowledge of insured that statement in proofs government.-Lyons v. Reinecke, 10 F.(20) 3. of loss was false not required to defeat recov- Om (U.S.D.C.Conn.) Income from securities ery on fire policies.-Walz v._Fidelity-Phenix bequeathed to trustee held taxable income.Fire Ins. Co. of New York, 10 F.(2d) 22.
Warner v. Walsh, 10 F.(20) 155. 553(1) (U.S.C.C.A.S.C.), False statement Com (U.S.D.C.Pa.) Annuity, paid to legatee of insured in proofs of loss held false swearing under will held not taxable income.-Beatty v. within condition of policy, and not mere mat- Heiner, 10 F.(20) 330.
9 (U.S.D.C.Ohio) Issuance of stock held Am236(19) (U.S.C.C.A.N.Y.) Evidence held to not conclusive that substantial value was re- sustain conviction for manufacturing liquor ceived by corporation, as respects liability for (National Prohibition Act (Comp. St. Ann. profits tax.-Gus Sun Booking Exchange Co. v. Supp. 1923, $ 1013814 et seq.)).-Rouda v. U. Deane, 10 F.(20) 378.
S., 10 F.(20) 916. Definition of "invested capital,” in statute providing for profits tax, is conclusive on ad
IX. SEARCHES, SEIZURES, AND FORministrative officials and courts.-Id.
FEITURES. Assessment of profits tax on basis of stock 247 (U.S.C.C.A.Cal.) Seizure of British issued held not justified, where corporation's vessel held justified.- Ford v. U. S., 10 F.(20) capital was merely nominal.-Id.
339. em 38 (U.S.C.C.A.N.C.) Evidence held suffi- 248 (U.S.C.C.A.N.Y.) Affidavit held not decient to go to jury on question of delivery of fective for failure to show that barrels to be stock certificates to donor's children as gift searched for contained alcoholic beverages.before his death (Revenue Act Sept. 8, 1916, U. S. v. Old Dominion Warehouse, 10 F.(20) 39 Stat. 756).-Grissom v. Sternberger, 10 F. 736. (20) 764.
Affidavit held to sufficiently show that liquor Om38 (U.S.C.C.A.III.) Declaration in suit to to be searched for was left at warehouse.-Id. recover income tax paid held too indefinite and w249 (U.S.C.C.A.N.Y.) Searching officer, aft: uncertain.-Lyons v. Reinecke, 10 F.(20) 3. er lawful entry, held not limited by terms of
Burden on plaintiff, suing to recover income warrant as related to liquors which he could tax paid, to allege facts showing income not sub- lawfully seize.-U. S. v. Old Dominion Wareject to tax.-Id.
house, 10 F.(20) 736. om 38 (U. S. D. C. Neb.) Individual beneficiary Lapse of time between seeing of liquor enter may to recover back federal estate tax
warehouse and search therefor held not too paid by executor.-Munroe v. U. S., 10 F.(20) long.-Id. 230.
Em 249 (U.S.C.C.A.N.Y.) Defendants may not w38 (U.S.D.C.Ohio) Court must decide right question whether federal officer's entry into to recover profits tax, irrespective of motive building, in basement of which defendants were of Secretary of the Treasury in imposing tax.- manufacturing liquor, was lawful, as not being Gus Sun Booking Exchange Co. v. Deane, 10 trespass on premises occupied by defendants.F.(20) 378.
Rouda v. U. S., 10 F.(20) 916. 38 (U.S.D.C.Pa.) Income tax, voluntarily m249 (U.S.D.C.Cal.) Prohibition agent may but erroneously paid, held recoverable.- Beatty personally receive and execute search warrants. v. Heiner, 10 F.(20) 390.
-U. S. v. Nestori, 10 F.(20) 570. Ow44 (U.S.D.C.Pa.) Prohibition director not Search warrants directed to divisional chief. punishable as person employed under “revenue or general prohibition administrator and his law” or “revenue provisions of a law."-U. S. assistants, agents, etc., held good.-IL v. McConnell, 10 F.(20) 973.
em 251 (U.S.C.C.A.Conn.) Statute providing
that property taken under revenue law shall be INTOXICATING LIQUORS.
irrepleviable, and deemed to be in "custody of I. POWER TO CONTROL TRAFFIC.
the law," does not apply to seizure under Nam2/2 [New, vol. 8A Key-No. Series]
tional Prohibition Act. --The Blairmore I, 10 F.
(2d) 35. (U.S.C.C.A.Mich.) Congress may prohibit all sales of intoxicating liquor, if suitable der National Prohibition Act is by suit for con
Remedy of owner of ship and cargo seized unprovision is made for nonbeverage sales.-Sher
demnation.-Id. man v. U. S., 10 F.(20) 17.
Ship captured in violation of National Prohi21/2 [New, vol. 8A Key-No. Series ] U.S.C.C.A.N.Y.) Eighteenth Amendment it was taken into port in wrong district.-Id.
bition Act not entitled to safe conduct, because gave the United States all the power necessary and appropriate to carry out object of the
X. ABATEMENT AND INJUNCTION, amendment.-U. S. v. Gaffney, 10 F.(22) 694.
264 (U.S.C.C.A.N.Y.) Tenant's right to IV. LICENSES AND TAXES.
maintain lease against landlord was gone. Em 108(1) (App.D.C.) Proceeding to cancel breaking covenant to obey National Prohibition permit for denaturing plant held prosecuted Law, and government, in abatement proceedunder proper section of Prohibition Act.--Her- ings, may assist landlord to recover premises man Chemical Co. v. Mellon, 10 F.(2d) 887. (Comp. St. Ann. Supp. 1923, & 1013844 et seq.). em 108(9) (App.D.C.) Order revoking permit -U. S. v. Gaffney, 10 F.(20) 694. to operate denaturing plant held not void for Emo265 (U.S.C.C.A.N.Y.) One may maintain delayed entry.-Herman Chemical Co. v. Mel. nuisance without having knowledge of actual lon, 10 F.(28) 887.
sales of liquor (National Prohibition Act. tit.
2, 88 21-23 [Comp. St. Ann. Supp. 1923, $$ VI. OFFENSES.
1013814jj-10138121]).-U. S. v. Gaffney, 10 F. 131 (U.S.C.C.A.Mich.) Sale of medicinal (20) 694. preparation to purchaser, who intends to use C271 (U.S.C.C.A.N.Y.) On bill to abate liqit as evidence, not an offense.-Sherman v. U. S., uor nuisance, all persons whose right, title, or 10 F.(20) 17.
interest may be affected by granting relief Om 138 (U.S.C.C.A.Cal.) Importing liquor is sought are proper parties (National Prohibition unlawful.-Ford v. U. S., 10 F.(20) 339.
Act, tit. 2, $$ 21-23 [Comp. St. Ann. Supp. 1923, VIII. CRIMINAL PROSECUTIONS.
$$ 1013812jj-10138421]).-U. S. v. Gaffney, 10
F.(2d) 691. Omw213 (U.S.C.C.A.Neb.) Indictment for main- Cm 275 (U.S.C.C.A.N.Y.) Evidence as to contenance of nuisance held sufficient.-Furlong v. tinuance of acts productive of liquor nuisance U. S., 10 F.(20) 492.
after filing bill for abatement is admissible.C 215 (U.S.C.C.A.Neb.) Indictment for un- U. S. v. Gaffney, 10 F.(20) 694. lawful sales of liquor held sufficient.-Furlong v. U. S., 10 F.(20) 492.
JEOPARDY. 236 (61/2) (U.S.C.C.A.R.I.) Evidence held to warrant finding that accused unlawfully pos
See Criminal Law, 196–202. sessed liquor found in his dwelling.-Horowitz
JOINT-STOCK COMPANIES AND BUSI. v. U. S., 10 F.(20) 286. Evidence held to warrant finding that accused
NESS TRUSTS. unlawfully possessed liquor found in his garage. 19 (U.S.C.C.A.N.J.) Admission in evidence -Id
of exhibit in which provision made for plaintiff's
For casos In Dec.Dig. & Am.Dig. Key-No.Series & Indexes see same topic and KEY-NUMBER
Om693 (App.D.C.) Judgment in partition ac
tion held res judicata in subsequent suit to quiet See Equity ww427; Execution.
title.-Smith v. Law. 10 F.(20) 651. For judgments in particular actions or proceed- Em703 (U.S.D.C.N.Y.) Incumbent of public of
ings, see also the various specific topics. fice concluded by judgment against predecesFor review of judgments, see Appeal and Er- sor respecting powers, privileges, and duties of ror.
office.--New York & Richmond Gas Co. v. PrenVI. ON TRIAL OF ISSUES.
dergast, 10 F.(22) 167. (A) Rendition, Form, and Requisites in General.
(C) Matters Concluded. 199 (2) (U.S.C.C.A.N.Y.) Answer held not to Ow713(2). (U.S.C.C.A.N.Y.) Merger or bar admit alleged oral contract to extend letter of extends to matters which might have been credit to purchase of coke, so as to require pleaded if cause of action is same, while estopgranting of motion non obstante veredicto.- pel applies to facts necessary to decision if Federal Coal Co. v. Royal Bank of Canada, 10 cause of action is different.-Irving Nat. Bank F.(20) 679.
v. Law, 10 F.(20) 721. Plea alleging cancellation, stating good de-w713(2) (App.D.C.) Extent to which judg. fense, judgment non obstante veredicto prop- ment is res judicata stated.-Great Atlantic & erly refused, despite claimed admission of con- Pacific Tea Co. v. West, 10 F.(20) 898. tract.-Id.
Om720 (U.S.D.C.N.Y.) State Supreme Court General verdict for defendant goes to all pleas judgment determining fair value of gas comin answer, and judgment non obstante veredicto pany's property for rate-making purposes conproperly denied, if some pleas good.-Id. clusive in subsequent suit.-New York & Rich
mw 199(3) (U.S.C.C.A.N.Y.) Sufficiency of evi- mond Gas Co. v. Prendergast, 10 F.(20) 167. dence not raised on motion for judgment non 725(1) (U.S.C.C.A.N.Y.) Merger or bar esobstante veredicto, and verdict conclusive if tends to matters which might have been pleadmaterial issue was involved.--Federal Coal Co. ed if cause of action is same, while estoppel v. Royal Bank of Canada, 10 F.(20) 679. applies to facts necessary to decision if cause
Plaintiff's motion for judgment non obstante of action is different.--Irving Nat. Bank v. Law, veredicto lies only when, on pleadings, defend- 10 F.(20) 721. ant has made no defense, and does not search m725 (6) (App.D.C.) Decree in injunction evidence.-Id.
suit held res judicata in subsequent landlord
and tenant proceeding on question of validity XII. CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION IN of covenant in lease.-Great Atlantic & Pacific GENERAL.
Tea Co. v. West, 10 F.(20) 898. Eww526 (U.S.C.C.A.N.Y.) Interpretation of de- Ew728 (U.S.C.C.A.N.Y.) If case is decided on cree may be investigated, not requiring fur
one or more grounds, each ground is a good esther evidence, but only record of opinions.
toppel.-Irving Nat. Bank v. Law, 10 F.(2) Armstrong v. De Forest Radio Telephone & 721. Telegraph Co., 10 F.(20) 727.
Om735 (U.S.C.C.A.Tex.) Finding in foreclosure m527 (U.S.C.C.A.N.Y.) Decree is enforced in
held not conclusive against new company's accord with findings of fact embodied in find- liability under statute.-International-Great ings directing decree.-Armstrong v. De For
Northern R. Co. v. Binford, 10 F.(20) 496, folest Radio Telephone & Telegraph Co., 10 F.(20) lowed in Same v. Edgeley, 10 F.(20) 501. 727.
Cm743(3) (U.S.C.C.A.N.Y.) Petitions based
on implied trust will lie to recover refund on XIII. MERGER AND BAR OF CAUSES OF franchise tax paid by lessee of street railway, ACTION AND DEFENSES.
and refunded to lessor after establishing title (A) Judgments Operative as Bar.
by mandamus.-American Brake Shoe & Com 572(2) (App.D.C.) Order sustaining de
Foundry Co. v. New York Rys. Co., 10 F.(20)
920. murrer to bill on ground that adequate remedy at law existed held not res judicata.-Trask v.
(D) Judgments in Particular Classes of Karrick, 10 F.(20) 995.
Actions and Proceedings. (B) Causes of Action and Defenses Merg
751 (U.S.D.C.Pa.) Acquittal held bar to subed, Barred, or Concluded.
sequent prosecution under res judicata doc587 (U.S.C.C.A.Tex.) Judgment against re
trine.-U. S. v. McConnell, 10 F.(20) 977. ceiver appointed by federal court held not on
XVII. FOREIGN JUDGMENTS. same cause of action as judgment in state court against new company successor.--Stripling v. Om828(1) (U. S. C. C. A. Mich.) Judgment in Schaff, 10 F.(2d) 500.
state court not controlling adjudication in suit Cw588 (U.S.C.C.A.Conn.) Judgment denying in federal court.-Walz v. Fidelity-Phenix Fire preference to United States against receivers is Ins. Co. of New York, 10 F.(20) 22. not res judicata of later petition to establish E828(1) (U.S.C.C.A.N.Y.) Circuit Court of trust in materials intermingled with other ma- Appeals must accept rulings of state courts as terials in hands of receivers.-Equitable Trust to final order on certiorari.-American Brake Co. of New York v. Connecticut Brass & Mfg. Shoe & Foundry Co. v. New York Rys. Co., Corporation, 10 F.(20) 913.
10 F.(20) 920. XIV. CONCLUSIVENESS OF ADJUDI
XX. PAYMENT. SATISFACTION, MERGER, CATION.
AND DISCHARGE. (A) Judgments Conclusive in General. 891 (U.S.C.C.A.Tex.) Causes of action held mm 641 (U.S.C.C.A.Okl.) Seller of sorghum seed
not same, and pendency of appeal from judgnot estopped from suing for buyer's breach by
ment in state court held not ground for denial decision of Food Administrator.-Griffin Gro
of order directing receiver to pay judgment cery Co. v. Richardson, 10 F.(20) 467.
against him in another action.-Stripling v.
Schaff, 10 F.(20) 500. (B) Persons Concluded. 668(1) (App.D.C.) Decree in suit by claim
JUDICIAL POWER. ant of fund in United States Treasury held res See Constitutional Law, Ow70.
American Brake Shoe & Foundry Co. v. New
York Rys, Co., 10 F.(2d) 28. See Criminal Law, E858–865.
Om 134 (2) (U.S.C.C.A.N.Y.) Every lease conII. RIGHT TO TRIAL BY JURY.
tains an implied obligation that lessee shall use
property lawfully and for lawful purposes.em 13(1) (U.S.D.C.Tex.) Suits at law tried by U. $. v. Gaffney, 10 F.(20) 694. jury, unless waived in writing by parties.--Allen v. U. S.. 10 F.(20) 807.
(E) Injuries from Dangerous or Defective Om 14(2) (U.S.D.C.Tex.) Amendment to act
Condition, providing for suits against the United States for war insurance held not to change require- damages against owner of building destroyed by
ww169(3) (U.S.D.C.La.) Petition in action for ment of trial to court rather than to jury.-Al- fire for failure to provide proper fire escapes len v. U. S., 10 F.(20) 807. On 28 (1) (U.S.C.C.A.Hawaii) Surety on exec
held to state a cause of action.-Huff v. Selber,
10 F.(20) 236. utor's bond, appearing and participating in proceedings, waived right to jury trial.-U. S. Fi.
VUI. RENT AND ADVANCES. delity & Guaranty Co. v. Vicars, 10 F.(20) 474. cm31(11) (U.S.C.C.A.Tenn.) Calling another
(C) Lien. jury immediately upon discharging first jury 239 (U.S.D.C.Tex.) Landlord has lien on after disagreement held not denial of benefits
tenant's property only for rents due, and duraof Constitution guaranteeing speedy public trial tion of such lien depends entirely on statute.by impartial jury.-Harris v. U. S., 10 F.(20)
In re McLaughlin, 10 F.(20) 810. 358.
See Automobiles; Receiving Stolen Goods.
LEASE. as when he has expressed it.-Assaid v. U. S.,
See Landlord and Tenant, 10 F.(20) 752. cm 131(2) (U.S.C.C.A.Va.) Ascertainment of
LEGISLATIVE POWER. juror's eligibility is largely within trial court's discretion.-Assaid v. U. S., 10 F.(20) 752. See Constitutional Law, m 60–62. em 131(4) (U.S.C.C.A.Or.) Refusal to permit examination of prospective jurors as to wheth
LIMITATION OF ACTIONS. er they had been witnesses in similar White Slave Act prosecution held no abuse of dis- II. COMPUTATION OF PERIOD OF LIMI
TATION cretion.-Noland v. U. S., 10 F.(20) 768. w 131(13) (U.S.C.C.A.Or.) Refusal to per
(B) Performance of Condition, Demand,
and Notice. mit individual voir dire examination of prospective jurors in White Slave Act prosecution Om66(4) (U.S.C.C.A.N.Y.) Statute begins to held no abuse of discretion.- Noland v. U. S., run, as respects subscriptions for stock, only 10 F.(20) 768.
when call is made and due, and only as to such cm 133 (U.S.C.C.A.Va.) Acceptance of jurors call.-In re Hannevig, 10 F.(2d) 941. is largely within trial court's discretion.-Ag. said v. U. S., 10 F.(20) 752.
(E) Absence, Nonresidence, and Conceal
ment of Person or Property. LANDLORD AND TENANT.
C87(1). (U.S.C.C.A.N.Y.) Law of California
(Code Civ. Proc. Cal. $ 351) tolls statute IV. TERMS FOR YEARS.
against nonresident who has never been in (B) Assignment, Subletting, and Mort
state; "return” being equivalent to "enter.”— sage.
Irving Nat. Bank v. Law, 10 F.(20) 721. Cum 79(2) (U.S.D.C.N.Y.). “Legal representa
of tives” does not mean or include "assigns."-In (H) "Commencement Action Other re Famous Fain Co., 10 F.(20) 540.
Proceeding. Assignee of lease takes no greater estate than 127(1) (U.S.C.C.A.Minn.) Allegations of conveyed by lease, and no less.-Id.
original pleading must be sufficiently specific to
enable court to determine whether amended (C) Extensions, Renewals, and Options to pleading refers to same cause of action.--Hor. Purchase or sell.
land v. Farmers' State Bank of Christine, N. 986(2), (App.D.C.) Lessee's right to renewal D., 10 F.(20) 478. held lost by failure to give notice of intent to
On 127(2) (U.S.C.C.A.Minn.) Amendment to clain it.-Clayman v. Totten, 10 F.(20) 910. petition, setting up no new cause of action, and
simply varying allegations, relates back to com(D) Termination.
mencement of action. Hovland v. Farmers' Om 10142 (U.S.D.C.N.Y.) Clause for forfeiture
State Bank of Christine, N. D., 10 F.(20) 478. on bankruptcy of tenant to be strictly construed of action, ought to relate back to date of filing
Amended pleading, setting up no new cause against landlord.-In re Famous Fain Co., 10 F. of original pleading.-Id. (d) 540. Forfeiture provision held contingent on in- troducing different cause of action does not
Om 127(11) (U.S.C.C.A.Minn.) Amendment insolvency of original tenant, and not on subse
relate back to beginning of action, so as to quent holder under assignment.--Id. Om !03(1) (U.S.C.C.A.N.Y.) Tenant's right to stop running of statute.-Hovland v. Farmers' retain possession of leased premises depends on
State Bank of Christine, N. D., 10 F.(20) 478. his observance of covenants in lease, both ex
IV. OPERATION AND EFFECT OF BAR press and implied.-U. S. v. Gaffney, 10 F.(20)
BY LIMITATION, 694.
Om 169 (U.S.C.C.A.N.Y.) Action not barred in VII. PREMISES AND ENJOYMENT AND New York, unless barred by law of place where USE THEREOF.
cause of action arose (Civil Practice Act N. Y. (B) Possession, Enjoyment, and Use.
13).-Irving Nat. Bank v. Law, 10 F.(20) 721. Om 130(4) (U.S.C.C.A.N.Y.) Tenant evicted
LIQUOR SELLING. may, for breach of covenant of quiet enjoyment, recover for improvements required by lease. See Intoxicating Liquors.
For cases in Dec.Dig. & Am.Dig. Key-No.Series & Indexes see same topic and KEY-NUMBER
en 103(2) (U.S.C.C.A.N.Y.) Instruction deny. ww25(7)(App.D.C.) Suit to cancel alleged of installing protective devices, held erroneously
ing recovery by servant, failing to perform duty fraudulent conveyances held not constructive denied.-U. S. Steel Products Co. v. Noble, 10 notice to purchaser of property from trustee.
F.(20) 89. Eggleston v. Wayland, 10 F.(20) 642.
C110 (U.S.C.C.A.N.H.) Safety Appliance Act MANDAMUS.
and rules of Interstate Commerce Commission
do not prescribe footboards on tender of engine. II. SUBJECTS AND PURPOSES OF RELIEF.
--Central Vermont Ry. Co. v. Perry, 10 F.(2d) (A) Acts and Proceedings of Conrts, 132. Judges, and Judicial Officers.
w! 10 (U.S.C.C.A.N.Y.) "Locomotive"
and 257(1) (U.S.C.C.A.Colo.) Defendant, denied "car" are not same, for purposes of Safety Apwrit of error for failing to file cost bond, held en- pliance Acts.-Lehigh Valley R. Co. v. Beltz, io titled to writ of mandamus.-Hostetter v. Symes, F.(20) 74. 10 F.(2d) 109.
Boiler Inspection Act imposes "absolute duty" Cam 61 (Ú.S.C.C.A.Neb.) Writ will not issue to to use safe locomotives.--Id. compel District Judge to try one who is with mol 12(!) (U.S.C.C.A.N.H.) Injury from vioout district serving valid sentence for a prior lation of Safety Appliance Act actionable unoffense.-Frankel v. Woodrough, 10 F.(20) 360. der federal Employers' Liability Act.--Central
Vermont Ry. Co. v. Perry, 10 F.(20) 132. (B) Acts and Proceedings of Public 0m- 129(5) (U.S.C.C.A.N.Y.). Causal conneccers and Boards and Municipalities.
tion between violation of Boiler Inspection Act 101 (App.D.C.) Duties of Secretary of the and injury essential to liability.-Lehigh Valley Interior under War Minerals Relief Act, or R. Co. v. Beltz, 10 F.(20) 74. construction thereof, are discretionary, and cannot be controlled by mandamus (Act March
(F) Risks Assumed by Servant. 2. 1919, § 5, amended by Act Nov. 23, 1921 w204 (2) (U. S. C. C. A. N. Y.) Assumption of [Comp. St. Ann. Supp. 1923, § 311514/160] ).- risk_is no defense in case of violation of BoilU. S. ex rel. Jarman v. Work, 10 F.(20) 989; er Inspection Act.-Lehigh Valley R. Co. v. U. S. ex rel. Carpy v. Work, 10 F.(20) 991. Beltz, 10 F.(20) 74.
Determination by Secretary of the Interior, that he could not consider claims under War' (G) Contributory Negligence of Servant. Minerals Relief Act held conclusive adverse dis- ns228 (2) (U.S.C.C.A.N.Y.) Contributory neg. cretionary action, not controllable by mandamus ligence is no defense in case of violation of (Act March 2, 1919, § 5, amended by act Nov. Boiler Inspection Act.-Lehigh Valley R. Co. v. 23, 1921 (Comp. St. Ann. Supp. 1923, § Beltz, 10 F.(20) 74. 311514/154]).-Id. Cw102(1) (App.D.C.) Court of Appeals of
(H) Actions. District of Columbia will not control by man- 251
(U.S.C.C.A.Cal.) Injured employee, damus exercise of judgment and discretion of electing to sue under Arizona Employers' LiaComptroller General, so as to compel issuance bility Act, need not tender back payment reof voucher.-U. S. ex rel. L, Margulies & Sons ceived on signing election to take compensav. McCarl, 10 F.(20) 1012.
tion.—Miles v. Lavender, 10 F.(20) 450.
m267(1) (U.S.C.C.A.N.Y.) Evidence to MARRIAGE.
mail carried on train held admissible on quesSee Divorce; Husband and Wife.
tion whether baggage master was engaged in in
terstate commerce.-Lehigh Valley R. Co. v. nad 20 (1) (U.S.C.C.A.Idaho) In absence of Huben, 10 F.(20) 78. statute forbidding marriage by contract, such am 276(1) (U.S.C.C.A.N.Y.) Evidence held to marriage is lawful.-Dawson v. U. S., 10 F.(20) show baggage master on train was engaged in 106. Cm 40(4) (U.S.C.C.A.Idaho) In Idaho,
interstate commerce.-Lehigh Valley R. Co. v. mar
Huben, 10 F.(2d) 78. riage may be presumed from living together as man and wife.-Dawson v. U. S., 10 F.(20) 106. C276(5) (U.S.C.C.A.N.H.) Evidence held in
sufficient to show death of brakeman due to abMASTER AND SERVANT.
sence of footboard on tender.-Central Ver
mont Ry. Co. v. Perry, 10 F.(20) 132. II. SERVICES AND COMPENSATION. m288(2), (U.S.C.C.A.Cal.) Whether second (B) Wages and Other Remuneration. mate assumed all risk of using ring bolt in place ww 69 (U.S.D.C.La.) Employees of railroad, of snatch block, held for jury.-Sporgeon v. Manot specifically mentioned in Director General's ma 289 (15) (U.S.C.C.A.Cal.) Whether second
hony, 10 F.(2d) 144. order, held not entitled to additional compensa
mate was contributorily negligent in using ring tion.-Cowles y. Arkansas & L. M. Ry., 10 F.
bolt in place of spatch block, held for jury. (20) 242. Right of railroad employees to additional com
Sporgeon v. Mahony, 10 F.(20) 144. pensation must rest on law.-Id.
VI. WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION ACTS. 80(2) (U.S.D.C.La.) Claims of railroad employees to additional compensation held not
(A) Nature and Grounds of Master's Lia
bility. barred by two-year limitation.—Cowles v. Arkansas & L. M. Ry., 10 F.(20) 242.
m351 (U.S.C.C.A.Cal.) Option to accept com
pensation under Arizona law not made until III. MASTER'S LIABILITY FOR INJURIES necessity arises.- Miles v. Lavender, 10 F.(20) TO SERVANT.
450. (A) Nature and Extent in General.
(C) Proceedings, m88(1), (U.S.C.C.A.Or.) Action under Ore- Cw405(6) (U.S.C.C.A.Tex.) Evidence held to gon Employers' Liability Law will not lie by
show employee had received all reasonable one not employé.-Pacific States Lumber Co. v.
treatment, and that injury to sacroiliac joint Bargar, 10 F.(20) 335.
was permanent (Texas Employers' Liability
Act (Vernon's Ann. Civ. St. Supp. 1918 art. (B) Tools, Machinery, Appliances, and
5246-1 et seq.)).- Ætna Life Ins. Co. v. EdPlaces for Work.
wards, 10 F.(20) 972. Om 101, 102(1) (U.S.C.C.A.N.Y.) Injuries held C4091/2 [New, vol. 7A Key-No. Series] actionable, though employee might have devised
(U.S.C.C.A.Cal.) Election under Arizona means to protect himself.-U. S. Steel Products Workmen's Compensation Law held for jury. Co. v. Noble, 10 F.(20) 89.
Miles v. Lavender, 10 F.(20) 450.