« SebelumnyaLanjutkan »
Blacks, Negroes, and Mulattoes—Book of Drafts.
BILLS OF EXCHANGE AND PROMISSORY NOTES—Continued.
can not be subjected to the payment of the debts of the irm. Belknap
v. Abbott & Cram, 411.
18. Money paid on notes given for a void patent right, may be recovered
back, and the collection of outstanding notes, in the hands of the vend-
ors of such void patents, will be enjoined. Darst v. Brockway et al.
19. A note or bill discounted by a bank, on which a greater rate of interest
has been taken than six per cent. per annum, in advance, is void.
Creed v. The Commercial Bank of Cincinnati, 489.
20. Where a bill of exchange, intended to be addressed to the defendant in
Philadelphia, is, by mistake, addressed to him in Ohio, and six per cent.
damages, on its being protested, have been paid, they can not be recov-
ered back. The Commercial Bank o. John Reed, 498.
21. Nor will such payment be evidence that the bank, by which the bill was
discounted, has taken a greater rate of interest than was allowed by its
BLACKS, NEGROES, AND MULATTOES—
1. All nearer white than black, or of the grade between the mulattoes and
the whites, are entitled to enjoy every political and social privilege.
Jeffries v. Ankeny and others, 375.
2. Where the court of common pleas instructed the jury that a man, who
has any negro blood whatever, was not a lawful voter, it is error.
Thacker v. Hawk, 376.
1. The act providing for the collection of claims against steamboats and
other water-craft, authorizing proceedings against them by name, ex.
tends the right of recovery to provisions, and all other necessaries fur-
nished for the use of the boat. Canal-boat Huron v. Simmons, 458.
2. The statute substitutes the boat for the owner, and authorizes suit against
it, by name, for all money demands against the owner, arising from
debts contracted on account of, or for the use of the boat, or for inja-
ries resulting to passengers or property by the boat, or from miscon-
duct of the officers and crew. Ib.
1. A sheriff's return, that he could find no goods or chattels, lands or tene-
ments of the principal debtor, unincumbered by mortgage, is sufficient
to authorize suit upon an injunction bond. Seymour v. King, 342.
2. Such return affords ample ground to commence the suit; under such cir-
cumstances the surety may protect himself by paying the debt and
claiming the benefit of the judgment by way of substitution. Ib.
3. A defective appeal bond, if it contains the substance of a bond, will sus.
tain an appcal, so far as to justify an order to file a new bond. Sater-
lee et al. v. Stevens, 420.
BOOK OF DRAFTS-
The book of drafts of the Connecticut Land Company is not ovidence of 8
legal title, but is evidence of an equity against the trustees of that
company. Kinsman v. Loomis, 475.
1. Land on the Ohio river, between high and low-water mark, is not com-
mon to the public, but may be conveyed by the adjacent proprietor,
whose land bounds on the river. Blanchard's Lessee 0. Collins and
2. Where a deed calls for an object on the bank of a stream, thence south,
thence east, thence north, with the bank of the stream, and with the
course of the bank to the place of beginning, the stream, at low-water
mark, is the boundary. Lamb v. Ricketts, 311.
3. Where the owner of land is bounded by a stream, he owns to the center
of the stream, subject to the easement of navigation ; but, to calculate
the quantity of land in a survey, no reference is had to what lies be-
tween low-water mark and the center of the stream. Ib.
4. The legislature may change the boundaries of a county; and, when
such change places an associate judge within the limits of another
county, who does not, within a reasonable time, remove into the limits
of the County for which he was appointed, he forfeits his office. Ohio
0. Choate, 511.
CASES EXPLAINED, AFFIRMED, DOUBTED, OVERRULED-
1. The Granville Alexandrian Society v. John Van Buskirk. Banking
privileges. Doubted. Ohio v. The Granville Alexandrian Society, 13.
2. Douglas v. Waddle, 10 Ohio, 413. Accommodation indorsers. Over-
ruled. Williams v. Bosson & Bros. 67.
3. Lodwick v. Kennedy, 7 Ohio, 433. Insurance. Overruled. Perrin's
Adm'r v. Protection Insurance Company, 170.
4. Fulton and Foster v. Lancaster Insurance Company, 7 Ohio, 5. Insur-
5. Riley and Van Amringe v. Johnson, 8 Ohio. Bills of exchange. Con-
sideration. Overruled. Carlisle v. Wishart, 172.
6. Brush's Adm’rs v. Ware, 1 McLean. 535. Patents. Recitals. Bell and
wife v. Duncan et al. 194.
7. Reeder et al. o. Barr et al., 4 Ohio, 496. Patents. Recitals. Ib.
8. Bank of Steubenville 'v. Leavitt et al., 5 Ohio, 207. Bank of Steuben-
ville v. Hoge et al. 6 Ohio, 18. Principal and surety. Explained.
Slipher v. Fisher et al. 301.
9. The Lessees of McCulloch v. Aten, 2 Ohio, 307. Gavit v. Chambers
3 Ohio, 495. Benner's Lessee v. Platter et al., 6 Ohio, 504. Boundary.
Watercourse. Lamb v. Ricketts, 315.
10. Dixon and Hawke v. Ewing's Adm’rs, 3 Ohio, 280. Principal and surety.
Affirmed. Bank of Lake Erie v. Western Reserve Bank, 444.
11. Moore's Lessee v. Vance, 1 Ohio, 1. Acknowledgment of deed. Affirmed.
Kinsman v. Loomis and Ward, 475.
12. Bank of Chillicothe v. Swayne and others, 8 Ohio, 257. Banks. Interest.
Affirmed. Creed v. Commercial Bank of Cincinnati, 489.
1. The assignee of a note not negotiable may sue the maker in chancory, to
enforce payment. Townsend 0. P. & G. Carpenter, 21.
2. The chancellor often refuses to aid in the execution of contracts which
be would not rescind. Watkins v. Collins et al. 31.
3. Inadequacy of price may be so gross as to carry evidence of fraud.
4. Equity bas no jurisdiction to compel a sheriff to pay over money collected
on an execution. Douglass v. Wallace, 42.
8. In the sale of real estate at auction, a mistake by the auctioneer, in en-
tering the name of the owner of the real estate in the memorandum of
sale, will be corrected in equity. Pugh and Shultz v. Chesseldine, 109.
8. If the purchaser has treated the contract as valid, although he might
have aband ned it, he will be required to perform it. Ib.
7. Where a patent for land recites assignments, by persons competent to
convey, there is no presumptive notice of latent defects to one who de-
rives title under such patent. Bell and wife v. Duncan et al. 192.
8. The defense of bona fide purchaser is available to one deriving title under
such patent. Ib.
9. It is otherwise, if the patent recites assignments by persons not compe-
tent to convey. Ib.
10. Where a bond is executed by one member of a firm, all the members
intending the instrument should bind them, the obligee has no remedy
against the firm at law, but on the ground of mistake may charge them
in equity. McNaughten v. Partridge et al. 223.
11. If the obligee, after discovery of the mistake, pursues the individual
maker of the bond, it is a ratification of the instrument, and relief
against the copartners will not be afforded in equity. Ib.
12. A mistake in law may be corrected in equity. Semble. Ib.
13, A general demand against a judgment debtor, to disclose his assets, that
they may be subject to execution, is proper. Miers and Caulson v. The
Zanesville and Maysville Turnpike Company, 273.
14. No suit lies against the stale to compel payment of subscription to stock.
16. Where there is a receiver of tolls appointed under the statute, by a court
of competent jurisdiction, it acquires authority to determine all ques.
tions touching the distribution and appropriation. Ib.
16. A judgment debtor may pursue different interests, and against different
persons, in the same bill. Cadwallader v. The Granville Alexandrian
Society et al. 292.
17. And may demand, in general terms, from bis debtor a disclosure of his
18. Where forfeiture or a penalty may ensue from the answer to a bill, the
defendant is not bound to answer.
19. Where a bill is framed in the alternative, charging that property is held
under an illegal and void agreement, and praying that it may be set
aside, or, if held valid, that the debtor's residuary interest may be sub-
jected to payment of the debt, the defendant may be protected in with,
holding a disclosuro, as to a part, while he would be bound to answer
the remainder. Ib.
20. To create a case of election, there must be a plurality of gifts or rights,
with an intention, express or implied, of the party who has the right
to control one or both, that one should be a substitute for the other.
Melick and wife v. Darling, 243.
21. The party who is to take has a choice, but he can not enjoy the benefits
of both. Ib.
22. Where a person without title conveys by deed of warranty, and after-
ward receives title, as trustee from the rightful owner, for the purpose
of transmitting it to a bona fide purchaser from the rightful owner, the
doctrine of estoppel does not apply. Burchard v. Hubbard et al. 316.
23. The legal title of a trustee, under a deed of trust, with power to sell for
the payment of debts, is not divested by discharge of the debts, but the
trustee may maintain ejectment. Moore o. Burnet, 334.
24. In an ordinary deed of trust a reconveyance from trustee to cestui que
trust is necessary, to reinvest him with the legal title. Ib. 341.
26. But a mortgage is a mere incident to the debt which it is intended to se-
It lives and dies with the debt; satisfaction destroys it. Ib.
26. Where, prior to a judgment, a permanent leasehold estate had been con-
veyed by deed, absolute upon its face, although intended only as secu-
rity, there remained only an equitable interest in the judgment debtor,
to which no judgment lien attached. Loring v. Melingy and others,
27. And the creditor who first pursued the equity by bill, is entitled to be
first satisfied. Ib.
28. The partition of lands incumbered by a dower estate, may be enforced
in equity by the owner of the incumbrance, he being also tenant in
common of the remainder. Morgan v. Staley, 389.
29. A transfer by a firm, to one partner, bona fide, and by him to a third
person, in like manner, for valuable consideration, passes both the legal
and the equitable title to the property against the creditors of the
firm. Wilcox and Welch v. Kellogg and others, 394.
30. The equity of creditors upon partnership property, for debts due them,
is only the equity of the partners in the property, and can only be
reached through the partners. Ib.
31. An absolute transfer of propetry, without fraud, does not come within the
provisions of the act of February 23, 1835, relating to fraudulent assign-
32. Joint property will, in equity, be subjected to the payment of partner-
ship debts. Belknap v. Abbott & Cram, 411.
33. Notes, given by one member of a firm to his partners, on its dissolution,
become their individual property, and, in the possession of their as-
signee, can not be subjocted to the payment of the debts of the firm,
34. To enjoin a judgment at law, on the ground of illegal interest, the bill
must show a tender of the amount equitably due. Shelton o. Gill et
35. An objection to the examination of a defendant in chancery as a witness,
without a special order for that purpose, comes too late at the final
hearing, and after cross-examination. Woods o. Dille et al. 455.
36. Where a parol contract, for the purchase or sale of lands, is admitted by
a defendant in his answer, without relying upon the statute of frauds
as a defense, performance will be decreed. Ib.
37. Possession, obtained under a contract of purchase, doos not become ad-
verse to the vendor, while the contract is acted upon, and payment
38. What protection will be afforded to a bona fide purchaser, without notice,
is a question which does not arise, where neither party has the legal
39. As between equities, the elder will prevail. Ib.
40. Relief will be afforded, in a court of equity, against the payment of
notes given for a void patent right. Darst v. Brockway et al. 462.
41. Money paid on such notes may, on the ground of failure of considera-
tion, be recovered back, and the collection of such outstanding notes,
in the hands of the vendors, will be enjoined. Ib.
42. Where an instrument, by mistake of the parties as to the legal effect of
the terms used, fails to carry out their intention, relief may be afforded
in equity. Evants v. Strode's Adm'r, 480.
43. A mistake of law will be corrected in equity. Ib.
44. Where a court of equity have all the parties before them, and can settle
and adjust all their rights, so as to avoid subsequent litigation, it will
do so, although relief might be had at law. Ib.
45. As where, after eviction, a bill was filed to correct a mistake, in a deed
which contained a defective warranty, the court having obtained juris-
diction to correct the mistake, and having the proper parties before
thom, will not drive the complainant to his action at law upon the
corrected deed, but will decree compensation. Ib.
46. A special act, authorizing Morris Seely to file a bill as in chancery,
against the state, and requiring the cause to be decided upon "princi-
ples of justice and good faith," must be construed as intending to re-
lieve the complainant from all technical objections that might arise in
a proceeding, according to the known usages of law and chancery, and
as conferring upon the court power to examine the claim, in the same
spirit of liberality that might be proper for the legislature to exercise.
Seely v. The State, 501.
47. In such case, the objection that the complainant has not, by performance
of his own part of the contract, placed himself in a condition to claim
damages of the state for her non-performance, will not be sustained,
although the objection might have prevailed in an ordinary chancery