Gambar halaman



10.- Not liable for loss by robbery if valuable secu-
rities carried on person of passenger.

Weeks v. N.
Y., N. H. & Hartf. R. R. Co. (Ct. App., N. Y.)..... 313
11.-Railroad conductor may eject passenger who has

lost and cannot present ticket. Jerome v. Smith
(Sup., Vt.) (N. C.)....

12.- Passenger. One riding on train is before he has

paid fare. Creed v. Penna. R. R. Co. (Sup., Pa.) (in

13.-Railroad ticket entit: to passage but in one direc-

tion. Keeley v. B. & M. R. R. Co. (Sup., Me.) (in

14.-Baggage. Trunk of passenger not going by same

train need not be carried except as freight. Graf-
fam v. B. & M. R. R. Co. (Sup., Me.).....

15.-Railroad company bound to keep approaches to sta-

tions safe: icy platform. Weston v. N. Y. E. R.
R. Co. (Ct. App., N. Y.)

CHAMPERTY.-Contract to pay attorney out of

proceeds of property recovered when sold not cham-

pertous. McPherson v. Cox (U. S. Sup.)...... 373
CHATTEL MORTGAGE.-Lease assigned as se-

curity need not be filed as. Booth v. Kehve (Ct. App.,

N. Y)
2.--Contemporaneous agreement treated as one contract


3.--Real estate; lex rei site governs transfer and mort-

gage of. Brine v. H. F. Ins. Co. (U. S. Sup.) 154
4.-- Place of Contract. Promissory notes negotiated

through broker and sold to party in another State.
In re Dodge (U. S. Dist.)

5.-Statute giving minor authority to sue has no extra-

territorial force. State v. Bunce (Sup., Mo.).... ....

rights; assessments for benefits and matters relating to
them are within the limits of State legislation, David-
son v. New Orleans (U. S. Sup.)....

2.-CIVIL RIGHTS. Fourteenth amendment directed only

against general State legislation. Petition of Wells
(U. S. Circ.) (in full.).

3.-COMMERCE. State law regulating commerce between

States; statute regulating rights of passengers in con-
veyances coming fronı out of State invalid. Hall v.
De Cuir (U. S. Sup.) (in full.).

4.-State legislation regulating transportation of cattle

invalid, neither within police or sanitary powers of
State. Hannibal & St. Jo. R. R. Co. v. Huson (U. S.
Sup.) 89 ; (in full)

5.- CONSTRUCTION. A provision that acts "shall not

be done applies to future acts only. County of
Macon v. Shores (U. S. Sup.)....

6.-CRIMINAL LAW. Congress may not make abortion a

crime in States, but may by penalties prevent send-
ing means of, through mails. United States v. Whit-
tier (U. S. Circ.)....

7.-DELEGATING to board of health power to make

ordinances as to the adulteration of milk within
power of Legislature. Polinsky v. People (Ct. App.,

V. Y.)...
8.-DISCRIMINATION. Statute unconstitutional as to

with; permitting mortgagor to sell for his own ben-

elit invalidates. Blakeslee v. Rossman (Sup., Wis.).. 193
3.-On property to be acquired, valid in equity. Wil-
liams v. Winsor (Sup., R. I.) (N. C.)...

4.- Property conditionally sold may be mortgaged by
vendor. Everett v. Hall (Sup., Me.)...

5.-On after acquired goods with power of sale to mort-
gagor void. Matter of Bloom (U. S. Dist.)....

6.--Ön stock of merchandise left in possession of mort-

gagor void. Mobley v. Letts (Sup., Ind.)...... 434
7.-Filing. Leaving with proper officer sufficient com-

pliance with statute. Gorham v. Summers (Sup.,

See Bankruptcy, 20, 21, 22.
CITIZENSHIP.-Indians not connected with any

tribe and paying tax are citizens. United States v.
Elm (U. S. Cire.)

CIVIL DAMAGE LAW.-Wife cannot recover either

actual or exemplary damages for threats and vulgar-
ity unaccompanied by physical injury. Calloway v.
Layton (Sup., Iowa.)......

CIVIL RIGHTS LAW.- Only one penalty recover-

able for violation as to several persons at one time.
Cent. R. R. Co. v. Green (Sup., Pa.) (N. C.)

COHOES.--Construction of charter of: elections of city

officers; declaration of result essential to complete elec
tion of alderman and other officers. People v. North
(Ct. App., N. Y.)...

COMMERCIAL AGENCY.- How far liable to

customer acting on representations as to credit.
Sprague v. Dunn (Phila. C. P.) (N. C.).

COMMON CARRIER.-Condition relieving carrier

from negligence of his own servants unreasonable and

void. Doolan v. Midland Ry. Co. (Eng. H. L.).. 126
2.-Liable to true owner of goods for damages from bill of

lading negligently issued to wrong person. Farm. &
Mech Bk, v. Erie Ry. Co. (Ct. App., N. Y)....

3.-Shipper receiving bill of lading before shipment of

goods bound by stipulations in exempting carrier.
Germ. F. Ins. Co. v. Memp. & Charl. R. R. Co. (Ct.
App., N. Y.)..

4.-Act of God; Chicago Fire was not. Disp. Trans. Co.
v. Thielbar (Sup., 111.).

5.-Carrier presumed to have authority to make contract

for carriage over; ultra vires cannot be set up as de
fense to negligence ; waiver by agent of shipper with
out authority does not relieve estoppel. 0. & M. R.
R. Co. v. McCarthy (U. S. Sup.).

6.-Limitation of liability; where two rates for carriage

exist, limitation except from willful misconduct of
carrier's servants reasonable. Lewis v. G. W. Rail-
way Co. (Eng. Ct. App.).

7.--A London carman is not. Poice v. Jacob (Eng. Co.

8.-Not relieved from liability because shipper violates

law against fictitious firms. Wood v. Erie Ry. Co.
(Ct. App., N. Y.)...

COMMON GAMBLER.-One offense under Rhode

Island statute as to playing faro constitutes. State v.
Melville (Sup., R. I.)......

CONFISCATION.-Sale of land by one in rebellion be-

fore passage of act gives good title. Conrad V.
Waples (U. S. Sup.) 352; (in full).

CONFLICT OF LAW.-Set-off governed by law of

place where action brought. Second Nat. Bk. V.
Hemingway (Suis, Ohio.) (N. C.)...

2. Statute of lineititinins of loci contractus not pleadable

one class may be valid as to other classes. State
v. Amery (Sup., R. I.) (N. C.)..

9.-DUE PROCESS of law; assessment submitted to court

is by. Davidson v. New Orleans (U. S. Sup.) 73;
(in full).

10.- EMINENT DOMAIN. General Drainage act of New

York is constitutional. In re Ryers (Ct. App.,

N. Y.).......
11.-ESTOPPEL. Estoppel; one taking benefit of law

cannot attack constitutionality. Bidwell v. City of
Pittsburg (Sup., Pa.)...

12.-EXEMPTION. Law of State void as to antecedent

creditors. Edwards v. Kearzy (U. S. Sup.) (in full). 346
13.--From taxation; Legislature may empower munici-

pality to exempt water company as to present and
future property. City of Portland v. Portland Wat.
Co. (Sup., Me.)..

14.-Ex POST FACTO LAW. Innocent act cannot be

made unlawful by subsequent legislation, United
States v. Fox (U. S. Sup.) (in full)....

17.-IMPAIRING obligation of contract. Corporations

by consolidation under new law accept terms of
and waive rights under old charter. Shields v.
State of Ohio (in full) (U. S. Sup.)...

16.--State cannot change rate of taxation of corpora-

tion contrary to charter. Farrington v. State of
Tennessee (U. S. Sup.).....

17.-Corporation; construction of charter. St. Clair
Co. v. People of Illinois (U. S. Sup.)..

18.-Limitation of taxation in charter a contract not

alterable by State. Farrington v. State of Ten-
nessee (U. S. Sup.) (in full).

19.-Increasing homestead exemption is and void.
Wilson v. Brown (Sup., Ala.).:

20.--Constitutional provision agaiast lotteries does not

affect previous grants. Stato v. Miller (Sup., Mo.)
(in full).

21.-Repeal by Virginia of funding act unconstitutional
(Sup. Ct. App., Va.) (C. T.)....

22.- Alteration of charter of corporation by State

where power is reserved valid; reduction of tolls on
railroad. American Coal Co. v. Consolidated Coal
Co. (Ct. App., Md.).....

23.-Consolidation by existing corporations under new

law divests of privileges under charters in conflict
with new law ; immunity from taxation. Maine
Cent. R. R. Co v. State (U. S. Sup.)...

24.-Prohibi ory liquor law valid against corporations

chartered to manufacture malt liquor. Boston

Beer Co. y. Commonwealth (U. S. Sup.)...... 431
25.-Homestead not exempt from debts contracted

before law. Woodlie v. Towles (Sup., Tenn.) 434
26.- Prohibitory liquor law does not as to corporations

authorized to manufacture malt liquor. Boston

Beer Co. v. Commonwealth (U. S. Sup.) (in full)..... 487
27.-City ordinance forbidding steamon railroads al-

ready constructed in city is valid. R. F.P.R. R. Co.
v. City of Richmond (U.S. Sup.).

28.- JUDGMENT. Of another State; record as to service

of summons impeachable. Marten v. Duncan (Sup.,

29.-LICENSE. State cannot discriminate against pro-

ducts of other States. Welton v. State of Missouri
(U. S. Sup.) (N. C.)..

30.--Limit of Federal law; an act committed in a State





be made offense by Congress. United States v. Fox.
(U. S. Sup.) (in full).

31.-MUNICIPAL BONDS void cannot be made valid with-

out consent of municipality. Horton v. Town of

Thompson (Ct. App., N. Y.),..
32.- MUNICIPAL CORPORATION. Legislature can compel

city to pay equitable claiing, and a law for that pur-
pose is not retroactive. Jefferson City Gas L. Co.
v. Clark (U. S. Sup.).

33.-Statute imposing debt usually but not legally due

invalid. Rader v. Township of Union (Sup., N. J.). 171
34. -- NAVIGABLE STREAMS. State may regulate naviga-

tion of small streams within its boundaries. Pound
v. Turck (U. S. Sup.)...

35.-Congress may authorize canal along small naviga-

ble stream. State v. City of Duluth (U. S. Sup.). . 194
36.-State has authority to improve and take tolls until

Congress exercises its powers. Wisc. Riv. Imp. Co.
v. Manson (Sup., Wis.).

37.-PARTY. Person not injured by statute cannot raise

constitutionality of. Town of Pierpont v. Loveless
(Ct. App., N. Y.)

38.-PATENT RIGHT NOTES. State laws regulating, con-

stitutional. Haskell v. Jones (Sup., Pa.) 267; Also

Woolen v. Banker (U. S. Circ.) (in full)..
39.--State legislation as to, invalid. State v. Lockwood

(Sup., Wis.)
40.-RAILROAD. Statute giving double value to owner

for cattle killed by; unconstitutional. A. & N. R.
R. Co. v. Baty (Sup., Neb.).

41.--Injuring cattle ; act unconstitutional which im-

poses liability without regard to circumstances.

Zeigler v. S. & N. R. R. Co. (Sup., Ala.)....
42.--SHIPPING. N. Y. State vessel lien law not uncon-

stitutional. King v. Greenway (Ct. App., N. Y.) 155
43. --SPECIAL LEGISLATION. Legislation in reference to

pre-existing corporations. Wallace v. Loomis (U. S.

44.--STATUTE OF LIMITATION. A State Legislature may

shorton the statute of limitation as to pre-exist-
ing debts, a reasonable time being left. Terry v.
Anderson (Sup. Ct., U. S.) (in full).

45. TAXATION. A municipality cannot tax its own

bonds. Murray v. Charleston (U.S. Sup.) (in full.).. 321
46.-Of lands in city for benefits of little or no advan-

tage to them, not unconstitutional; extending
boundaries of city. Kelly v. City of Pittsburgh (Sup.,

Pa.) (N. C.)...
47. --TELEGRAPH. Instrument of commerce within con-

trol of Congress; State legislation as to, when in-
valid. Penn Tel. Co. v. W. U. Tel. Co. (U. S. Sup.)
(C. T.) 277; (Abst.) 291 ; (in full)...

48.- VIRGINIA. Statute of, making coupons of State

bonds receivable for all dues to State, constitutional
and applicable to fines devoted by the Constitution

to public schools. Ex parte Clarke (Sup., Va.) ..... 387

tive construction of statute of limitation not
allowable. People v. Lord (N. Y. Sup.)....

CONTEMPT-Party who flees jurisdiction of court

will not be permitted to prosecute or defend action
until he returns. Hovey y. McDonald (Sup. Ct., D.

C.) (N. C.)....
2.-By attorney; what does not constitute. People v.
Randall (Ct. App., N. Y.)....

See Bankruptcy, 36.

render and re-issue of railroad bonds. Union Pacific

R. R. Co. v. Stewart (U. S. Sup.)...
2.-Contract dependent on rise and fall of gold. Ames
v. Quimby (U. S. Sup.)...

3.-When time essence of; where goods are to be man-

ufactured within specified time, a failure to deliver
within time avoids contract. Jones v. United States
(U. S. Sup.)..

4.--Contract for storage. Hazleton v. Weld (Ct. App., N.

5. -Acceptance of; order for money dependent upon

future event. Robbins v. Blodgett (Sup., Mass.).. 311
6.-Sale of “about" a specified quantity: about"a word

of expectancy, not of quantity. Kellogg v. Norman
(Ct. App., N. Y.).....

7.--EXPRESS CONTRACT is not to be varied by implied.
Hawkins v. United States (U.S. Sup.)....

8.--GOVERNMENT. The provisions of acts authorizing

contract with government must be followed to make
contract valid. Hawkins v. United States (U. S.

9.- Statute requiring government contracts to be in

writing mandatory. Clark v. United States (U. S.

10.- ILLEGAL CONTRACT. Moneys paid by stockholder

upon an illegal issue of corporate stock afterward
abandoned, recoverable back. Ib.

11.-By child with parent that he will release to other

children all claim to parent's estate valid, and not
within statute of frauds or contrary to that of wills.
Galbraith v. McLain (Sup., Ill.)...


CONTRACT - Continued.

holder to sell corporate charter is. In re Meeker (U.
8. Circ.) (C. T.)...

13.--Note given for diseased sheep, sold in violation of

statutes, when valid, when not. Caldwell v. Budall
(Sup., Iowa)....

14.--Money deposited with third
back. Davis v. 2. & him. Pasty upon, recoverable

Co. (Eng. C. D.) (N.

15.- IMPLIED ; performance by one party to parol con-

tract raises an implied contract to pay a quantum

meruit. Clark v. United States (U. S. Sup.)..
16. -NON-FULFILLMENT of; for personal service; ill-

ness caused by imprudence is valid excuse for. K-
v. Raschen (Eng. Ex. D.) (in full.)

17.-PATENT RIGHT. Contract for royalty under liti-

gated patent valid. Jones v. Burnham (Sup., Me ).. 391
18.-RESCISSION; between two parties for benefit of third

cannot be rescinded without consent of third after

acceptance. Bassett v. Hughes (Sup., Wis.)
19. -SALE ; of real estate ; construction of parol addi-

tion to terms rescission. Hussey v. Payne (Eng.
Ch. D.)....

20.- Purchase of goods; vendor cannot enforce against

assignee of vendee. Clark v. Dickinson (Ct. App., N.

See Bankruptcy, 37-40; Constitutional Law, 15-27;

Negal Contract.
CORPORATION.-AGENCY. Brokers issuing deben-

tures of company agents for it and company bound
by their fraudulent representations as to it.

Wier v.
Barnett (Eng. Ex. D.).
2.-CHARTER; formed under general act ; repeal of act

does not repeal charter. Freehold M. L. Assoc. v.

Brown (Ch., N. J.).....
3.-DIRECTORS' contracts with ; a loan made by the di-

rectors of a company to the company held not void.
Omaha Hotel Co, v. Wade (U. S. Sup.)

4.-Fraud by; stockholders may ask for relief against.
Bayless v. L. M., etc., R. R. Co. (U. S. Circ.).

5.-Dissolution by expiration of charter terminates

pending action against directors ; estoppel. Sturgis

v. Vanderbilt (Ct. App., N. Y.)..
6.- Negligence in permitting fraudulent transfer of

stock does not render liable to stockholders negli-
gently furnishing opportunity for the fraud.

R. R. Co.'s Appeal. (Sup., Pa.).

7.-OFFICERS. Provision of 2 R. S. 604, 88, as to

electing officers as applied to manufacturing corpor-
ations and mandamus will enforce. People v. Cum-
ming (Ct. App., N. Y.)....

8.-REMOVAL OF CAUSE; corporation entitled to benefit

of act of Congress of 1867 for removal of cause and
verification of affidavit by president of corporation

sufficient. Mix v. Andes Ins. Co. (Ct. App., N. Y.).. 475
9.--STOCKHOLDER taking part in alteration of charter

cannot deny regularity of proceedings. Chubb v.

Upton (U. S. Sup.) (in full)
10.- Liability under New York statute ; a contract and

not in nature of a penalty. Flash v. Conn (Sup.,

11.-Liability of; construction of New Jersey statute

relating to. Griffith v. Mangan (Ct. App., N. Y.)... 333
12.-One holding stock as collateral security liable as.

Pullman v. Upton (U. S. Sup.) (N. C.) 358 ; (Abstract)
363 ; (in full)..

13.-Who is also creditor not liable for debts of, under

New York law. Mathes v. Neideg (Ct. App., N. Y.) 432
14.---Liability of for debt of corporation is extinguished

by debt of corporation to him. Agate v, Sands (Ct.
App., N. Y.)...

15.-- Subscription for stock; reducing capital releases

from liability under. Santa Cruz R. R. Co. v.
Schwartz (Sup., Cal.)....

16.-ULTRA VIRES; may enter into partnership unless for-

bidden by charter. Allen v. Woonsocket Co. (Sup.,
R. (.).....

17.-That loan was made in violation of charter ; no de-

fense. M. L. Ins. Co. v. Wilcox (U. S. Circ.) (in full). 426
18.--Church corporation borrowing money to build

meeting house is not. First Baptist Church y. Nee-
ley (Sup., Penn.)...

19.--Sewing machine company may take notes of third

person in payment of machines. Taylor v. Thomp-
son (App. Ct., II.)

20. -UBURY. Provision that it shall not plead usury, ex-

tends to its sureties. Stewart v. Bramhall (Ct. App's
N. Y.).

See Religious Corporation.
COSTS.-- Creditors of insolvent corporation intervening

in and of receiver not entitled to. Matter of People,
etc., v. Sec. L. Ins. Co. (Ct. App., N. Y.).....

2.- In U. S. Supreme Court ; printing records of court

taxed to losing party. J. & St. L. R. R. Co. v. Vance
(U. S. Sup.)....

3.- In foreclosure of mortgage by default. Armstrong v.

Murdock (Sup., N. Y.)....
COUNTER-CLAIM-In action by United States not

allowed in excess of plaintiff's claim. Schaumberg v.





2.- Payments made by administrator to distributee and 37.-Writ of error reaches only errors in the record.
litigated, not in action by distributee against adminis-

People v. Carey (Ct. App., N. Y.)...

trator on another claim. Wright v. Wright (Ct. App., 38.-RAPE. Force is necessary to constitute. People v.
N. Y.)..
253 Royal (Sup., Cal.)....

COVENANT.-By grantee limiting the use of real prop-

39.- ROBBERY Venue ; prisoner under arrest, carrying
erty will be enforced when of value to the beneficiary ;

stolen goods into county Margerum v. State (Sup.,
estoppel. Lottimer v. Livermore (Ct. App., N. Y.).... 374


2.- Not to assign not usual one in lease. Hampshire v.

38.-TRIAL. Presence of prisoner necessary.

State v.
Wickens (Eng. Ch. D.) (N. C.) 139; (in full)....

Able (Sup., Mo.).


39.--In misdemeanors punishable only by fine, prisoner
CRIMINAL LAW.-ABORTION. Woman on whom per-
formed not an accomplice. State v. Hyer (Sup., N.J.1.171, 355

need not personally appear. Neaves v. State (Ct.
App., Tex.).

2.--ACCOMPLICE. A bystander in case of a murder by 40.-- VENUE in embezzlement. Queen v. Rogers (Eng.
mere approval, not. State v. Cox (Sup., Mo.)... 354

Ct. App.)....

3.-Testifying for prosecution under promise of pardon ;

See Burglary; Common Gambler; Constitutional Law, 6;
rights of, at trial. Wright v. Rindskopf (Sup., Wis.).. 354 Extradition Libel, 4 ; Obscene Libel; Pardon.
4.-BAR. To indictment, nolle prosequi of former indict-
ment not. Hester v. Commonwealth (Sup., Pa.) (N. C.) 259

CUSTOM-Bill of exchange imposing fixed sum as liq-
5.-BIGAMY. Utah divorce no defense to. State v. Arm-

uidated damages on bills dishonored valid. Willans
ington (Sup., Minn.) (in full.)...
451 V. A yers (Eng. Priv. Counc.)......

6.---BURGLARY. Obtaining entrance to a bank by means of 2.-That outgoing tenant of farm shall look exclusively
a conspiracy is a constructive breaking and entering..

to incoming one for seeds sown, etc., bad in law.
Johnston v. Commonwealth (Sup. Ct., Pa.)

17 Bradburn v. Foley (Eng. C. P. D.) (in full).... ...... 483
7.-Ownership of premises entered may be laid in a part.
nership. Quinn v. People (Ct. App., N. Y.).

333 DAMAGES.-Rule of; when railroad company wrong.
8.-Dwelling-house, disconnected store in building, where

fully seizes street. Blisch v. Chi. & N. W. Ry, Co.
people live, is part of. Quinn v. People (Ct. App., N.Y.) 333 (Sup., Wis.)
9.-Entrance between 5 P. M. and 7 A. n., in winter, in

2.-In Confederate currency contract; value of currency
night. Brown v. State (Sup., Ga.).....

375 must be measured by greenbacks not gold. Bissell
10.-COMMUTATION. Of sentence ; acceptance by prisoner

v. Hayward (U. S. Sup.).....

not necessary for validity. Matter of Victor (Sup.,

3.-Sale at market price; to fix market price offer to
Ohio) (N. C.)..

399 sell must be in the present. Harrison v. Glover
11.-DISORDERLY HOUSE. Canvas tent within statute.

(Ct. App., N. Y.).....

Kilman v. State (Ct. App: Tex.) (N. C.).,.

278 4.–Measure of; in contract to pay in specified bonds;
12.-CRIMINAL EVIDENCE. Failure by criminal in custody

when judgment for face value of bonds not allow-
to contradict accomplice not an admission. Com. v.

able. Wintermute v. Cooke (Ct. App., N. Y.)..... 314
Malone (Sup., Mass.).......

37 5.--Measure of; for breach of contract of sale. Mason
13.-Conviction on uncorroborated testimony of accom-

y. Decker (Ct. App., N. Y.).

plice valid State v Hyer (Sup., NJ.) (N. C.).... 138 6.-Measure of; in contract for personal service as
14.-Accomplice as witness ; agreement by public prosecu-

theater actor. Sutherland v. Wyer (Sup., Me.)... 390
tor promising pardon not binding in court ; witness not 7.-In trespass and cutting of timber; innocent pur-
entitled to have an attorney. Wright v. Rindskopf

chaser not liable to land-owner for increased value
(Sup., Wis.)....

211 from cutting. L. S. & M. S. Ry. Co. v. Hutchins (Sup.
15.-Prisoner in own behalf may be asked questions tend-

Com., Ohio)...

ing to impair credit. People v. Carey (Ct. App.,N.Y.) 432

See Bankruptcy, 41.
16.-Mailing obsecne matter, sealed packages cannot be

opened in the mails. Matter of Jackson (U. S. Sup.) DEAD BODY.-No property in; no replevin lies for
(in full)..


coffin and body therein. Guthrie v. Weaver (Ct.
17.-- EXAMINATION cannot be required after indict-

App., St. Louis) (C. T.)....

ment, Case of Gesner (N. Y. Sup.) (C. T.)..

18.-EMBEZZLEMENT. Taking wild rabbits by game-keeper

DEFENSE.-Motives for bringing action none. Morris

not. Queen v. Reed (Eng. Q. B. D.) (N. C.)

v. Tuthill (Ct. App., N. Y.).

19.--Wild animals not subject. Queen v. Reed (Eng. Q.

2.-In action for loss by negligence collection of insur-
B. D)


ance money no defense. Carpenter v. East. Tr, Co.
20.--FALSE MONEY. Issuing notes for less than one dollar;

(Ct. App., N. Y.).....

3.-Breach of agreement to furnish information ; that
notes payable in goods not in violation of Federal
statute. United States v. Van Auken (U. S. Sup.)

erroneous information verbal, not. Sprague v. Dun
(Com. Pl., Phila.)

(Abst.) 431; (in full.).

21. - FALSE PRETENSES. Post-dated check may be subject
of Lesser v. People (Ct. App., N. Y.).


DEFINITIONS.-" Family” includes wife and chil-
22,-FORGERY. Putting forged deed on record is. United

dren. Hall v. Stephens (Sup. Ct., Mo.) (N. C.).. 3
States v. Brooks (Sup., D. C.)....


DELIVERY.-Liquor and labels sold together; labels
23.-FORMER JEOPARDY. Defendant was indicted for steal-

delivered constitutes part delivery. Garfield v.
ing a number of articles together, he was convicted as

Paris (U. S. Sup.) (in full)..

to some of them. He was then indicted for stealing the
same articles, the court quashing the first indictment. DIVORCE.-Alimony pendente lite is not allowable
Held, that he could not be convicted as to the same

unless marriage shown. Collins v. Collins (Ct. App.,
articles as he was at first convicted. State v. Clark

N. Y.)....,

(Sup., Ark.)


2.-Alimony courts here have only powers over divorce
24.-Illicit DistilliNG.–What indictments under R. S.

given by statute ; alimony is allowance, not estato.
88 3266, 3281, must contain. United States v. Sim-

Bacon v. Bacon (Sup., Wis.)....

mons (U, S. Sup.). .


3.-Utah divorce does not protect against bigamy, State
25. -INDICTMENT. Assault with dangerous weapon; duplic-

y. Armington (Sup., Minn.), (in full)...

ity. People v. Carey (Ct. App., N. Y.).


4.--Judgment of, in court of domicile of parties valid,
26. -INTENT." Essential to offense against law relating to

without personal service valid. Hunt v. Hunt (Ct.
sale of intoxicating drinks. Farrell v. State (Sup.,

App., N. Y.)....


27 --Essential to violation of revenue law. Felton v. DOMICILE.-Taxation; choice of tax payer does not
United States (U. S. Sup.)

473 overcome preponderance of evidence as to. Mayor
28.-Joinder of several distinct misdemeanors in same

v. City of Boston (Sup., Mass.) (in full)...

indictment when not ground for reversal of judgment. 2.- Intention to change residence not executed, does
Rolinsky v. People (Ct App., N. Y.), .


not change. Platt v. Atty.-Gen. (Eng. P.C.).... 270
29. --JURY TRIAL. Right of trial by, cannot be waived. 3.-Removal without intention to reside elsewhere per-
State v. Lockwood (Sup., Wis.)


manently does not change: evidence of intention.
30.-JUSTIFICATION. Acquittal of defendant does not jus-

Hindman's Appeal (Sup., Pa.)..

tify assault upon officer when making arrest Com. 4.-What it depends upon. Hardman's Appeal (Sup.,
v. Coughlin (Sup., Mass. )
37 Pa.) (N.C.)..

31.--LARCENY Coffin covering corpse after burial sub- 5.-Wife cannot change domicile of absent husband.
ject of
State v. Dochke (Ct. App., St. Louis), 296 Porterfield v. City of Augusta (Sup., Me.).....

32. --MURDER IN SECOND DEGREE. What facts will justify
conviction for. Blake v. People (Ct. App., N. Y.).... 292

DOWER.-Statute of limitation runs as to. Proctor v.
33. --Nolle prosequi not bar to second indictment. Hester

Bigelow (Sup.. Mich.) (N. C.) 278; (in full).....

v. Commonwealth (Sup., Pa.).


DUE PROCESS of law, what is. Pennoyer v. Neff (U.
31. --PLEADING. Joinder of separate larcenies in one in-


8. Sup.)....
dictment not allowable. State v. Jourdon (Sup., 2.–Taxation ; when proceedings must be submitted to


court it is. Davidson v. New Orleans (U. S. Sup.) (in
35. -Variance in indictment for theft of gelding not sus-


toined by proof of ridgling. Brisco v. State (Ct. App.,


EASEMENT.--Ancient lights; quantum of enjoy-
38 --PRACTICE. Convicted prisoner fined may at discretion ment; right is not to be measured by purpose for which


[ocr errors]


EIGHT HOURLAW.-Federal statute does not ap-

ply to employee of contractor with government; priv-

ity of contract. United States v. Driscoll(U.S. Sup.) 473
EMINENT DOMAIN.-What must be stated in peti-

tion to authorize proceedings. Marsh v. Appleton
(Ct. App., N. Y.)...

2.-Compensation must be in money. After price is

filed applicant for proceedings may abandon but
may not reconsider election. State v. Halsted (Sup.,
N. J.)....

3.-Additional compensation to land owner for tele-

graph on railroad not required. W. U. Tel. Co. v.
Rich (Sup., Kan.)....

See Constitutional Law, 10.
EQUITABLE LIEN.-Use by railroad company of

money loaned does not give lien on road. Thorn-

ton v. St. Paul & C. Ry, Co. (Ct. App., N. Y.)........ 374
ESTOPPEL.- Grantee in fee of tenant for life may

dispute title of remainderman. Christie v. Gage
(Ct. App., N. Y.)...

2.-Railroad aid bonds ; invalidity of, cannot be raised

by commissioners issuing. First Nat. Bank v.
Wheeler (Ct. App., N. Y.)...

3.-New reason for act done cannot be assigned after

suit brought. 0. & M. R. R. Co. v. McCarthy (U. S.

4.-Statements by maker of dishonored promissory note

to intending purchaser, constitute. "Reedy v. Brun-
ner (Sup., Ga.)..

5.--Corporate director who has sold stock and no longer

acts, not estopped by action of corporation. Sturgis
v. Vanderbilt (Ct. App., N. Y.).....

6.-Fire insurance company keeping silent when re-

quired to give notice, operates as ; informality in
proofs of loss not at the time objected to. Bennett

v. Maryland Fire Ins. Co. (U.S. Dist.) (in full)...... 363
7.-Life insurance; when neglect of company to notify

as to place of payment prevents forfeiture by non-
payment. N. Y. Life Ins. Co. v. Eggleston (U. S.
Sup.) (in full)...

8.-What does not amount to. Lattimer v. Livermore
(Ct. App., N. Y.)..

9.-When prinicipal bound by acts of agent; ratification.
Ahern v. Goodspeed (Ct. App., N. Y.)....

10.-An equivocal promise will be construed against the

one inäking it; parting with property on the prom-
ise, sufficient consideration. White v. Hoyt (Ct.
App., N. Y.)..

11.-On part of life insurance company; circumstances

raising. Meyer v. Knickerbocker Life Ins. Co. (Ct.

App., N. .)....
12.-Giving undertaking for re-delivery in replevin estops

denying possession. Diossy v. Morgan (Ct. App.,
N. Y.)....

13.-Silence alone is not what is essential to. Mecouch
v. Loughery (Phila. C. P.).

See Constitutional Law, 11; Fire Insurance, 6, 14; Life

Insurance, 2, 9.

corporation may be examined under Code, 88 870 and

873. People v. Mut. Gas Light Co. (Sup., N. Y.) (in full) 70
EXEMPT PROPERTY.-Increase from ; not on

that account exempt. Citizens' National Bank v.
Green (Sup., N. C.) (in full).

EXPERT TESTIMONY.-Physician testifying as

expert entitled only to ordinary witness fees. Ex
parte Dement (Sup., Ala.) (N. C.)

2.--Who is not expert. Nelson v. Sun Ins. Co. (Ct. App.,
N. Y.)...

EXTRADITION.-English extradition act; British

subject not surrendered to Switzerland. Queen v.

Wilson (Eng. Q. B. D.)....
2.-An extradited criminal cannot be tried for offense

other than that for which he was delivered up, and
not named in treaty. Commonwealth v. Hawes (Ct.
App., Ky.) (in full)...

3.--Between States; offender may be tried for offense

from that for which he was delivered up; one il-
legally surrendered may be tried. Matter of Noyes
(U. S. Dist.) (in full)..

EVIDENCE.-Verbal agreements at time of or pre-

vious to written contract are not admissible to vary,
but those made subsequently may be. Hawkins v.
United States (U.S. Sup.)....

2.-0f experts as to negligence in navigating vessel, is

admissible. East. Transp. Line v. Hope (U.S. Sup.) 35
3.-Parol admissible to show condition of making

written contract. Greenwault v. Kohne (Sup., Pa.). 37
4.-Confessions of lessee of distillery are admissible

against owner in proceedings under revenue law

for forfeiture. Doblins v. United States (U.S. Sup.) 56
5.--Question designed to show bias of witness compe-

tent. Wottrick v. Friedman (Ct. App., N. Y.)..... 57
6.-A judgment of divorce is admissible in collateral

action to show status of divorced wife of party

EVIDENCE- Continued.

that action. Wottrick v. Friednian (Ct. App., N.

7.-A witness may testify that he has an impression

to that effect." Carrington v. Ward (Ct. App., N. Y.) 74
8.-Of expert ; what questions proper. Carpenter v.
East. Tr. Co. (Ct. App., N. Y.)....

9.--Parol as to written contract; meaning of words may

be explained by expert. Wilson v. Sun Ins. Co.
(Ct. App., N. Y.).

10.-0f marriage; hearsay not sufficient. Chamberlain
V. McKibben (Ct. App., N. Y.).,

11.-Burden of proof; the presumption in revenue

cases from failure to make proper entries thrown
on defendant. Lileanthal y. United States (U.S.

12.-Fire Insurance. Quantum of proof to support

defense of willful burning not same as required to
convict of arson. Kane v. Hibernia Ins. Co. (Ct. Er.,

N. J.) 171; (S. C. 179; (in full)
13.-Violation of city ordinance is in question of negli-

gence. City of Rochester v. Montgomery (Ct. App.,
N. Y.)..

14.- Title. Invalid contract fully performed admis-

sible to show agency. Dunn v. Hornbeck (Ct. App.,
N. Y.)....

15.-Entries in books of employer not admissible against

employee not making them. Van Sachs v. Kretz
(Ct. App., N. Y.)

16.--Correspondence between solicitors as to action

privileged from inspection. Bullock v. Corrie (Eng.
Q. B. D.)...

17.-- Privilege ; inquiry as to arrests of witness privil-
eged. People v. Brown (Ct. App., N. Y.)....

18.- Agent's admissions after transaction not admis-

sible against principal. Furst v. Second A. R. R.
Co. (Ct. App., N. Y.)....

19.-Testifying to best of belief and not positively,

proper ; questioning accused as to motive allowable.
Blake v. People (Ct. App., N. Y.).

20.-Contradicting other witness, what competent. Spar-

rowhawk v. Sparrowhawk (Ct. App., N. Y.)..
21.-Contradicting witness, party may, his own. Mo-
Culloch v. Hoffman (Ct. App., NY)...

22.-Written Instrument. Deed may be shown to be

mortgage by parol. Peugh v. Davis (U.S. Sup.). ... 373
23. --Agent's declarations not admissible to bind princi-
pal. Krekeler v. Thoule (Ct. App., N. Y.)...

24. -Burden of proof, negative allegation involving

criminal neglect of duty or fraud, etc., must be
proved. Arthur v. Unkhart (C.S. Sup.).....

25.-Written Contract. Parol evidence to explain

meaning of terms admissible. Lawrence y, Galla-
gher (Ct. App., N. Y.)....

26. -- Parol, when admissible to explain writing. Whites

Banks v. Myles (Ct. App., N. Y.)....
27.-Slander. On charge of want of chastity specific

immoral acts may not be shown by defense, but gen-
eral reputation may. Duval v. Davey (Sup. Com.,

28.-Declarations of vendor after sale not admissible

against vendee. Burnham v. Brennan (Ct. App.,
N. Y.)....

29.-Expert, not allowable in question of negligence,

within general experience. Shafter v. Evans (Sup.,

See Bankruptcy, 19, 55, 56 ; Criminal Law, 12-16.

eased pigs for sale in market not a representation of

soundness. Ward v. Hobbs (Eng. Ct. App.).....
FEDERAL COURTS.-Not foreign to State tribu-'

nals but of a different sovereignty. Pennoyer y. Neff
(U. S. Sup.)........

FIRE INSURANCE.-Conditions in policy as to

ownership; landlord of leased property is sole and
unconditional owner within meaning of policy, not-
withstanding lease. Lycoming Fire Ins. Co. v.
Haven (Sup. Ct., U.S.)..

2.-Sale under foreclosure of mortgage, there being no

change in possession, does not avoid policy under
condition against change of title. Ley y. Home Ins.
Co., Columbus (Sup., Minn.)..

3.-Condition in policy; use of kerosene refers to a single

use. Matson v. Farm Build. F. Ins, Co. (Ct. App., N.

4.-Valuation; under Wisconsin statute statement of value

in policy is conclusive, and not to be waived by stipula-

tion. Reilly v. Franklin Ins. Co. (Sup., Wis.)...
5.-Subrogation, contract for, with mortgagee as to his

own interest; when valid. Ulster Co. Sav. Inst. V.
Decker (Ct. App., N. Y.).....

6.-Estoppel; silence of company when required to give

notice operates as; notice after loss and informality in
giving not then objected to, no defense; pleading Ben-

nett v. Maryland Fire Ins. Co. (U. S. Dist.) (in full.).. 303
7.- Alienation of title, condition forbidding violated by

death of insured. Sherwood v. Agricultural Ins. Co.

(Ct. App., N. Y.).
8.-Waiver; condition avoiding policy if possession changes

may be waived by verbal contract of company's agent.

farad mit




FIRE INSURANCE -- Continued.

9.-Warranty of description in application; reference to

application not in company's possession does not con-
clude sured. Vilas v. N. Y. Cent. Ins. Co. (Ct. App.,
N. Y.)...

10.--Title, want of, to premises insured, when no defense.

Munroe Co. M. Ins. Co. v. Robinson (Sup., Pa.)... 513
11.-Under provision that policy is void if there is Other

insurance not indorsed on policy, a general notice of
such insurance, not stating amounts to agents, will not
save avoidance. Billington v. Prov. Ins. Co. (Ct.
Error, etc., Ontario.)....

12.- Construction of policy doubtful, and contradictory

provisions construed so as to avoid warranty. First
Nat. Bk. v. Hartford Ins. Co. (U. S. Sup.).

13.-Ownership; statement that lessor owns uncondition-

ally property does not avoid policy. Lycoming F. Ins.
Co. v. Haven (U. S. Sup.) (in full.)..

14.-Conditions avoiding policy; unoccupied building ; es-

toppel ; knowledge of agent knowledge of company ;
agent of company cannot be made agent of insured by
stipulation; waiver. Gans v. St. Paul Ins. Co. (Sup.,

15. – Willful burning i proof of, need not be beyond

reasonable doubt. kane v. Hibernia Ins. Co. (Ct. Er.,
N. J.) (in full)....

16.-A fire policy was conditioned to be void if the insured

premises should be vacant, and the condition was not
to be waived except by written consent indorsed
thereon. Held, that a verbal consent of the company's
agent, and a memorandum on the agent's

books, was
not a waiver of the condition. Walsh v. Hartford F.
Ins. Co. (Ct. App., N. Y.)...

17.-Conditions on back of policy referred to therein, bind-

ing; incumbrance on property, confessed judgment
unexecuted is. Kensington Nat. Bk. v. Yerks (Sup.,

18.-Eminent domain; insured property being acquired

for public improvements does not relieve insurer: Col-

lingridge v. Roy. Ex. Assur. Corp. (Eng. Q. B.D.)... 290
19.-Mortgage ; insurance by mortgagor for benefit of

when company may pay loss to mortgagor.
Stearns v. Quincy M F. Ins. Co. (Sup., Mass.)... 312
20.-Conditions in policy against vacant building; saw-

mill temporarily unused in dry weather not a vacant or
unoccupied building; increase of risk; applies only to
future acts. Whitney v. Black R. Ins. Co. (Ct. App.,
N. Y.)......

FIXTURES.--Rolling stock on railway is not real estate.

Williamson v. N. J. South. R. R. Co. (Ct. Er., N. J.) (N.

2.-Chairs fitted to a theatre and screwed to floor, are so

as to authorize a mechanics' lien. Gross v. Jackson
(C. P., N. Y.) (N. C.)

FORECLOSURE.-In what manner interest of mort-

gage on may be stated under Code, $ 1244, in referee's

deed. Randel v. Van Ellert (N. Y. Sup.) (C. T.).. 41
2.-Referee to compute amount due must take oath. Ex-

change Fire Ins. Co. v. Early (N. Y. Com. Pl.) (C.

FORGED PAPER.- Bank paying checks on forged

indorsement cannot hold depositor. Welsh v. Germ.
Am. Bk. (N. Y. Super ) (N. C.)

FRAUD.-Sale by one partner of an insolvent firm to an-

other is not. Russell v. McCord (U. S. Dist.)..... 334
2.-Premiums paid upon life policy taken upon false repre-

sentations, not recoverable back unless representa-
tions influenced plaintiff. A promise is not a fraud.

Rohrscheider v. Knick. Ins. Co. (Ct. App., N. Y.)... 454
3.-Purchase of goods on credit by one without means,

when fraudulent and when not so. Talcott v. Hender:
son (Sup., Ohio.)

4.-Equity will not relieve against mere moral wrong; nor

against failure to fulfill verbal agreement as to pur-
chase of land. Watson v. Erb (Sup: Com., Ohio.)... 489

See Bankruptcy, 63-68.

HABEAS CORPUS.-- Judgments by courts having

jurisdiction will not be reviewed by Petition of Gor-
man (Sup., Mass.)

HIGHWAY.-- Corporation occupying highway must

keep it in repair. Penn. R. R. Co. v. Irwin (Sup. Ct.,

2.--Owner of adjoining land may temporarily use. Mal-
lory v. Griffey (Sup., Pa.)..

3. ---Change in grade of, entitles land owner to additional

compensation. City of Youngstown v. Moore (Sup.
Com., Ohio.)

4.-Cul de sac may become, by dedication. Bartlett v.
City of Bangor (Sup., Me.) (N. C.)..

HOMESTEAD.- Single man with servants not entitled
to. Howard v. Marshall (Sup., Tex.)....

HUSBAND AND WIFE.-Wife cannot after di-

vorce maintain action for assault during coverture.
Abbott (Sup., Me.) (N. C.)..

2.-Torts during coverture, husband not liable to wife

for. Abbott v. Abbott (Sup., Me.) (in full)... 283
3.—Husband liable for necessaries for wife rightfully

leaving him, but not for other things, Thorpe v.
Shepleigh (Sup., Me.)

INDORSEMENT-Collateral security, holder of note

secured by mortgage may look first to accommoda-
tion indorser. First Nat. Bk, of Buff. v. Wood (Ct.
App., N. Y.)...

ILLEGAL CONTRACT.-When parties equally

to blame, money paid in, recoverable back if there is
locus penitentice and contract incomplete. Knowl-
ton v. Cong. & Emp. Spring Co. (Ú. S. Circ.) (in

2.-Agreement to purchase stock to be delivered not

presumptively a gaming contract. Story v. Solomon
(Ct. App., NY).

3.-Mortgage given to compound felony will be set

aside. Henderson v. Palmer (Sup., Nil.) (N. C.).. 63
4.-Lease by agent of house to be used for gambling

does not defeat action for rent by innocent land-
lord. Stanley y. Chamberlain (Sup., N. J.) (N. C.)
119; (Abst.)....

5.-Security given on compounding offense against Fed-

eral revenue law void. Wright v. Rindskopf (Sup.,

See Contract, 10-14.
INFANCY.-No distinction between void and void-

able contracts. Harner v. Dipple (Sup. Ct., Ohio)
(N. C.).....

2.-Defense of ratifcation, what is not. Trowell v.
Shenton (Eng. Ct. App.)..

INJUNCTION.-Person injured by, can look only to

the security given for remedy; when condition not

broken. Palmer v. Foley (Ct. App., N. Y.)..... 57
2.-Will not be granted to restrain acts done under

valid act of Congress. State v. City of Duluth (U.
S. Sup.).....

3.- Mere delay not ground for refusing. Fulwood v.
Fulwood (Eng. Ch. D.).....

INNKEEPER.--Has llen on guest's horses for entire
bill of guest.

Mulliner y. Florence (Eng. Ct. App.)
(N. C.)

INSANITY. - The presumption 'is of sanity until in-

quest found then of insanity. Titcomb v. Vantyle
(Sup., Ill.)....

INTERNAL REVENUE. - Forfeiture, acts of

lessee of land upon which distillery stands bind

owner. Dobbins v. United States (U. S. Sup.). 56
2.-Revenue collector may not examine paid bank

checks under 8 3177, R. S. U.S. United States v.
Mann (U. S. Sup.) (in full).

3.-Evidence of witnesses not admissible to supply want

of entries required by law to be kept. Bergdoll y.
Pollock (U. S. Sup.)........

INTEREST.-In case of conflict of law between

place of contract and of payment, parties may stipu-
iate ; judgment does not change rate in Iowa.

Cromwell v. County of Sac (U. S. Sup.) 252 ; (in full) 264
2.-Statute and not contract governs rate when noto
is past due. Duran v. Ayer (Sup., Me.)...

3.-Rate of, after maturity of instrument governed by

statute, not by instrument. Eaton v. Boessonault
(Sup., Me.) (N. C.)....

JUDICIAL OFFICER. Linbility for official acts; not

Tiable civilly for erroneously sentencing to imprison-

ment. Lange v. Benedict (Ct. App., N. Y.).... 234
JUDGMENT.-In United States District Courts ex-

tends to all parts of State in which district is. Pre-

vost v. Gorrell (U. S. Circ.).
2.-Of another State; impeachment of record of ser-

vice of summons allowable. Marten V. Duncan
(Sup., Kan).

3.-Of U. 8. Circuit Court, footing of, same as that of


conveyance to wife by solvent husband not void as
to future creditors without proof of intent to defraud;
one then having_right of action for tort not subse-

quent creditor. Evans v. Lewis (Sup. Com., Ohio.).. 134
2.-Impeachable by future creditors; bankruptcy dis-

charge not bar to action for. Dewey v. Moyer (Ct.
App., N. Y.)...,

8.-To set aside fraudulent sale of goods, knowledge must

be shown in vendee. Dickinson v. Adams (U. S. Dist.) 472
4.-Chattel mortgage on merchandise left in possession of

mortgagor fraudulent; what is fraudulent arrange-
ment. Southard v. Bennet (Ct. App., N. Y.)....

See Bankruptcy, 68.
GIFT-Donatio mortis causa. Gift of bank deposit re-

ceipt without delivery to donor incomplete. Moore v.
Ulster Banking Co. (Ir. Q. B.) (N.C.).


GITARANTY_Construction of instrument of con-

« SebelumnyaLanjutkan »