« SebelumnyaLanjutkan »
mortgage. Held, that she should be rolioved from the consequences of
ESTATES OF DECEDENTS.
TABLISH NEGLIGENCE. – In an action against a railroad company to re-
his negligence. Louisville etc. R. R. Co. v. Berry, 329.
pany for personal injury received through its negligence, evidence
the plaintiff. Chattanooga etc. R. R. Co. v. Liddell, 169.
not for the purpose of establishing the truth of his statements, but
ciently near in point of time to warrant their being submitted to a
shown that he has misapplied any principle of law. Id.
in the month of August by the holiler, who was then nearly eighty.
road company to recover for personal injury, the declarations of the
missible. Chattanooga etc. R. R. Co. v. Liddell, 169.
purporting to have been written by a sick juror to the trial judge is not
preliminary proof of the genuineness of such letter. State v. Smith, 266.
ING. — If a replevin bond which forms the basis of a suit on a judgment
dence of its contents is admissible. Knickerbocker v. Wilcor, 595.
VARIED BY PAROL. — A sale and assignment of two of three mortgage
gage as security for the payment of his notes. Jennings v. Moore, 601.
ing, and specially exempts one of the parties from the performance of
agreement drawn previous to the contract sued on is not admissible
as rebutting evidence. Wilbur v. Stoepel, 568.
reads, “We promise to pay to the order of myself,” and is signed by
ligors was intended as the payee. Jenkins v. Bass, 344.
AND Child. An alısolute promise in the form of a note to pay a cer.
should never be collected. Brook v. Latimer, 292.
tending to show that a promissory note absolute in terms, and given by
ovidenco which forbids a written instrument to be varied or contradicted
by parol. Id. 18. CONTRACTS - PAROL EVIDENCE TO Show EXECUTION.- Conversations and
negotiations preliminary to a written agreement, although merged in it, may still be admissible, not to explain its terms, but to throw light upon the question of its execution, or other questions connected therewith.
Wilbur v. Stoepel, 568. 800 APPBAL AND ERROR, 3, 4; CONTRACTS, 2, 8; CORPORATIONS, 28; CRIM.
INAL LAW; Gifts, 1; INSURANCE, 18; LIBEL AND SLANDER, 17-22 ;
EXECUTIONS, 1. PROPERTY SUBJECT TO. — AFTER THE DEFAULT OF A MORTGAGOR OF
CHATTELS, he has no interest in the mortgaged property subject to exe.
cution against him. Leadbelter v. Leadbetter, 738. 2. Trust PROPERTY, WHEN NOT SUBJECT TO. — If the income of a fund is
vested in A, provided that B shall be entitled to support therefrom as long as she shall remain a widow, the interest of B cannot be reached by a bill in equity and applied to the payment of her creditors. Her in. terest is not alienable, because if any part of her interest were given to her alienee, it would not be applied to her supporte Sluttery v.
Wason, 448. 3. TERMINATION OF TIME FOR ISSUING EXECUTION IN FORECLOSURE Suits.
If a statute limits the time within which execution may issue in cases for the recovery of money to five years after the entry of judgment, no execution can issue after that time under a decree foreclosing a mort. gage, though it specially provides that no judgment shall be docketed for any deficiency should the proceeds of the sale be insufficient to pay
the amount found due. Jacks v. Johnston, 50. 4. TIME WITHIN WHICH EXECUTION MAY ISSUE IS NOT EXTENDED by an order
staying proceedings. Cortez v. Superior Court, 37. 6. ORDER DIRECTING EXECUTION TO ISSUE AFTER THE LAPSE OF THE TIME
within which the statute declares it may be issued is in excess of the
jurisdiction of the court. Id. See ASSIGNMENT FOR BENEFIT OF CREDITORS, 1; HOMESTEAD, 7; RECEIVERS;
EXECUTORS AND ADMINISTRATORS.
1. CONFLICT OF LAWS - ESTATES OF DECEDENTS - LIABILITY OF EXECUTOR
FOR ASSETS IN A FOREIGN COUNTRY. – If an executor in this state is also ancillary administrator in a foreign country, and, as such, has within his control personal assets in such country, which he refuses or willfully neglects to bring into this, he may be charged therewith in the
settlement of his accounts in this state. In re Ortiz, 44. 2. ID. — IT IS THE DUTY OF A DOMICILIARY EXECUTOR to gather in and
account for foreign assets of his testator, to the extent of his ability to do so, and the court of the domicile may compel him to account for his
willful neglect to perform such duty. Id. 3. ID. IF THE ESTATE OF A DECEDENT IS SITUATE IN TWO OR MORE
COUNTRIES, and his executor incurs expenses of administration, they should be paid out of that part of the estate in the administration of which they were incurred, and not out of the part of the estata sita
ated in another country. Id. 4. DECEASED CONTRACTOR — Right to SHARE IN PROFITS. - If several persons
secure and enter into a contract for the doing of work, and commence its performance, and then one of them dies, and the others perform the contract, they must account to the representatives of their deceased
fellow.contractor for his share of the profits. Jepson v. Killian, 508. 6. ELECTION BY WIDOW IN IGNORANCE OF Facts NOT BINDING. — Under
a statute allowing the widow to take under her husband's will, or to elect to repudiate it and take under the intestate law, an election by her to take under the will, made in ignorance of the facts, and of her rights and of the relative values of the properties between which she may choose, is not binding upon her, especially if made shortly after her
husband's death. Estate of Woodburn, 932. 6. INCOME, WHEN PASSES TO TENANT FOR LIFE. — Where a testator has
made a lease of his land for oil purposes prior to his death, under a lease providing that he shall receive a definite portion of the oil produced, and in his will has bequeathed the income of his estate to ten. ants for life, his share of the oil produced after his death is income, to
which the tenants for life are entitled as such. Id. 7. ELECTION BY Widow, allowed by statute, is a right to choose between
abiding by her husband's disposition of his property or the right to disregard it and claim under the intestate law. These rights are inconsistent with each other, and cannot co-exist. She must choose one or the other, and cannot choose both; nor does her right of choice depend in any degree on the mention or omission of her in her husband's will, or on the quantum of benefit she receives or renounces under it. Estate
Q Cunningham, 901. 8. ELECTION BY WIDOW. – Where the husband's will directs a conversion
of his real estate into personalty, and the wife elects to take under the intestate law, her rights are fixed irrespective of the will, and she can. not claim that the conversion operates so as to entitle her to one half of the fund absolutely; for, as to her, the fund must be regarded as real
estate, and she is only entitled to a half-interest therein for life. Id. 9. Widow's right of election, given by statute, is paramount to her huse
band's power of disposition by will, and if she elects to disregard the latter, she can claim her statutory estate in the land itself, and at law it is that only to which she is entitled; but in equity, if she has acquiesced in a sale made under the will, and made claim to the proceeds, she thereby relinquishes her dower, and the land passes to the pur. chaser discharged of her estate in it. The fund, however, arising from the sale is still treated as realty as to her, and she is entitled to a half.
interest therein for life. Id. 10. ELECTION BY WIDOW. – The question whether a widow filed a formal
paper, electing to take against the will, voluntarily or under stress of an order of court, is entirely immaterial to her rights. Such writing is un
important, except as evidence. Id. 11. ESTATES OF DECEDENTS - CONFIRMATION OF, IS INDISPENSABLE. - A sale,
by the orphans' court, of the estate of a decedent for the payment of debts, does not divest the title of the heirs until after confirmation thereof, and the execution and delivery of a deed by order of the court; and until such deed is delivered, an heir or his vendee may maintain ejectment against the purchaser at such sale, even though the latter has paid the
purchase-money and has gone into possession. Greenough v. Small,
859. See APPEAL AND ERROR, 1; HOMESTEAD, 8; JUDGMENT8, 19; PERSONAL
FIXTURES. FACTORY AND ITS EQUIPMENTS MAY BE PERSONAL PROPERTY WHEN. - A
factory with its equipments, though it is affixed to the soil, may have impressed upon it the character of personal property by the acts and conduct of parties dealing with it as mortgagees and owners, and this character, when once impressed upon it, will be retained, unless by decree it is transformed into real property. Horn v. Indianapolis Nato Bank, 231.
FRAUD. JUDGMENTS, PROCUREMENT OF, BY FRAUD, IS QUESTION OF Fact. - A claim
that a judgment rendered in another state was procured by fraud and collusion presents a question of fact to be determined by the jury, un.
der proper instruction. Knickerbocker v. Wilcox, 595. See AGENCY, 2; ASSIGNMENT FOR BENEFIT OF CREDITORS, 1-3; CORPORATIONS,
23; CRIMINAL LAW; SALES, 16.
FRAUDULENT CONVEYANCES. EVIDENCE OF INTENT. – Where a sale of personal property is attacked as hav.
ing been made with intent to hinder, delay, and defraud creditors, the seller may testify as to whether or not such was his intent in making the
sale. Gardom v. Woodwird, 310. See ASSIGNMENT FOR BENEFIT OF CREDITORS, 2, 3; CHATTEL MORTGAGES,
1-4; HUSBAND AND WIFE, 2-12; SALES.