it occurred, are sufficiently described to give railroad corporation, purchases a tract of a clear idea of the injury and to identify the land, near which the right of way for the place where it occurred, it is sufficient. railroad track had been located, and thereBrown v. Town of Southbury.-Filed Dec. upon he offered the company of which he 16, 1885.-Conn. was a director, the right of way through his RAILROAD COMPANY-PRIVATE CROSSING land, but his offer was refused. Subsequently -INJURY TO STOCK-DAMAGES.-Where a the company decided to change the route party is permitted to make a private cross- and to run the track through his land. Some ing of a railroad track, for his own convenience, if his stock stray upon the track at said crossing, the company is not liable for injury to said stock, but if the stock belonging to another, stray upon the track by way of this private crossing and are injured conveyance of the tract of land to it on the or killed, the company is liable for damages. Where the controlling facts are not traversed, it is not error for the court to instruct the jury what verdict to render.- Wabash Ry. Co. v. Williamson.—Filed Dec. 9, 1885.-Ills three years after the road was built, the company and the owner of the land referred to, failed to agree upon the amount of damages for the right of way. The company thereupon bring an action to compel an absolute ground that the purchaser was a director of the company at the time of purchase, and that the land was purchased for the company. Held that the bill could not be maintained.—Sandy River Ry. Co. v. Stubbs.— Filed Dec. 14, 1885.—Maine. REFORMATION OF A DEED-PAROL EVI RAPE ASSAULT WITH INTENT TO COMMIT -SIMPLE ASSAULT.-An instruction that the crime of rape included the crime of an as- DENCE.-Where the description of property sault with intent to commit rape, and also in a deed is so indefinite as to leave it unthe crime of a simple assault, and afterwards certain what property was intended to consubmitting the issue of assault and battery, is vey, parol testimony may be received to not erroneous.-State v. Mitchill.-Filed show what property was intended. In an Dec. 17, 1885.-Iowa. action to remove a cloud from a title, if the plaintiff's title is put in issue, he must prove RAILROAD AID TAX- -UNITED VOTE OF title in himself.-Richie v. Pease.-Filed TOWN AND AN INCORPORATED VILLAGE IN June 13, 1885.-Ills. THE TOWN. Where the citizens of a town vote upon the question of granting aid in REDEMPTION OF LANDS SOLD ON EXECUthe construction of a railroad, and there is TION-CONDITIONS OF.-Where land has an incorporated village within the town, the been sold on execntion, the judgment debtor citizens of the village may participate in the may redeem the same, at any time within election. Where such tax is about to be six months after the sale, by paying to the voted upon, and one or more persons can- purchaser the purchase money, together vas the citizrns soliciting them to vote for with two per cent per month interest on the the proposed tax, and promising certain same, and all assessments of taxes or other one's that if they will so vote, there will be assessments which the purchaser may have refunded to them fifty per cent ofthe amount paid on the same.-Campbell v. Oaks.— of taxes they pay, if such tax be voted, the Filed Dec. 22, 1885.—Cal. election will be declared void by reason of such promises.-C. M. & St. P. Ry. Co. v. Shea. Filed Dec. 15, 1885.-Iowa. RAILROAD COMPANIES-PRESUMTION OF negligence—EVIDENCE.-Where a passenger train is thrown from the track, there is a CORPORATION- --FIDUCIARY presumtion of nepligence on the part of CHARACTER OF DIRECTOR.—A director in a the company, and the burden of proof is on RAILROAD the company, to show that there was no neg- RAILROAD COMPANIES-DISCRIMINATION ligence in regard to the management of the IN RATES-POWER OF COURTS TO CONTROL. train, or the condition of the track. A phys--A railroad corporation cannot lawfully ician may testify as to expressions of suffer- discriminate in freight tariff and give to one ing as the result of an injury, if made to lower rates that another, on the same class him in the course of medical treatment, of freight. Where a contract for freight is even though such expressions are made after based on the quantity shipped, allowing a a trial for damages for the injury has com- shipper of large quantities lower rates than menced.-C. C. C. & I. Ry. Co. v. Newell. the shippers of small quantities, it is illegal -Filed Dec. 12, 1885.-—Ind. and against public policy. Such acts of discrimination may be enjoined by the stae. RAILROAD COMPANY-ACTION FOR PER Courts.—Scofield v. L. S. & M. S, Ry. Co SONAL INJURY-PLAINTIFF MUST ALLEGE-Filed Dec. 15, 1885.—Ohio. NEGLIGENCE. In an action for personal in jury, which occurred while getting off the SHERIFF'S DEED-VOID-COLOR OF TITLE. cars, the plaintiff alleged in his complaint -A sheriff's deed, although invalid or actthat the platform at the station was "out of ually void, if it is good in form, professes to repair" and "wholly unsuitable for the recep- convey the property and is duly executed, tion of passengers," but did not allege neg- will give color of title. Where one coligence on the part of the company. Held tenant, assumes to convey the entire land and so describes the land by by metes and bounds, it will give to the grantee color of title. What constitutes color of title is a bad on demurrer.-Penn. Co. v. Marion.— Filed Dec. 16, 1885.-Ind. SALE OF LUMBER SURVEY-STATUTORY REFERENCE-ENTRY OF JUDGMENT BY question of law, the question of adverse CLERK, Where a reference is ordered and possession under it, is a question of fact.in the order of referance it is provided that Packard v. Moss.—Filed Nov. 27, 1885.— judgment shall be entered in accordance Cal. with the referee's report, the clerk of the court is authorized to enter judgment upon REQUIREMENTS.—A vendor of lumber and the filing of the report, without further shingles, cannot recover the price thereof, order of court.--Bowie v. Borland--Filed unless there be a survey of it by the proper Dec. 23,1885.-Cal. officr. The leading case on this point, is Durgin v. Dwyer, 68 Me. 143. Other cases which make a distinction as against this rule, are Abbott v. Goodwin, 37 Me 203; and Rogers v. Humphrey, 39, Me. 382. In this case, ruling was had against the defendant to which he alieged exceptions, and on appeal the exceptions are sustained.-Richmond v. Foss.-Filed Dec. 12, 1885.—Me. REMOVAL OF EXECUTORS--POWER OF ORPHANS COURT—-APPEALS.-The orphans court can only remove an executor or administrator for certain specified causes, and the defendant must have an opportunity to be heard against the motion to remove. The causes for which he may be removed are first, when he fails to make his report as required by statute, and second, where he SELLING INTOXICATING LIQUORS WITHOUT sells or removes any property belonging to LICENSE-INDICTMENT.-In an indictment the estate without the permission of the for selling liquor without license it is not court being first obtained. An appeal from the orphans court to the court of appeals is not final.--Levering v. Levering.--Filed Dec. 17, 1885. Md. necessary to allege that the defendant had no permission to do so, nor is it necessary to prove the want of qualification to obtain a license. It is no defense to a prosecution for selling liquors to be drank on the prem ises, to show a license to sell in quantities. -People v. Jefferson.-Filed Dec. 15, 1885. N. Y. SALE OF WOOL-SUCJECT TO GRADE OF INSPECTION.Where goods are puschased subject to inspection, and the inspector departs from the usual mode of inspection, and the goods are delivered to the purchaser, and retained by him, he is bound for the purchase price, having waived the wrongful inspection, by receivnig and retaining the goods.-Mehereen v. Ball.-Filed Dec. 19, 1885. Cal. SUNDAY-DOCKET ENTRY OF JUDGMENT. -Where by mistake a docket entry of judgment is made as of sunday, when in fact it was not so rendered, the judgment may be amended at any time. Where the error is one of substance, the judgment cannot be amended after the expiration of term at which it was rendered, but where the error is one of form only. it may be amended at any time.-Ecker v. First Nat'l Bank.-Filed Nov. 20, 1885.-Md. SET SHERIFF'S SALE-SUBSEQUENTLY ASIDE TAXES PAID BY THE SHERIFF'S YENDEE.-Where land is sold by the sheriff and the sale is subseqnently set aside, the sheriff's vendee has a lien on the land for any taxes he may have paid on the same.— Harlan v. Jones.-Filed Dec. 9, 1885.—Ind. STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS- -RE-TRIAL ON AMENDED COMPLAINT.-Where, upon appeal, a case is remanded for new trial, it is not the commencement of a suit, although the original petition be amended and the statute of limitation connot be pleaded on the re-trial where the original petition was filed within the limit of the statute.-Myers v. Kirt.——The general rule that the title to chattels SALE-WARRANTY-WAIVER OF NOTICE. -Where a party purchases a threshing machine, which the seller warranted to work properly, and after trial the seller sent a mechanic to make some change or repairs, and afterwards the machine not working satisfactorily, the purchaser returns the machine and demands the money paid on the same, Held, that the seller could not recover the balance due on the contract; that by sending a man to repair the machine he waived the right to notice of intention to rescind; and that the purchaser having returned the machine, was entitled to a return of money paid.-Davis v. Butrick.-Filed Dec. 17, 1885.-Iowa. SUPPLEMENTARY PROCEEDINGS-DISCRETION OF THE TRIAL COURT.-The examination of a defendant, in supplementary proceedings, is largely in the discretion of the court, and an appellate court will not disturb the judgment unless it clearly appears that that there has been an abuse of the discretion and injurtice done.-Heilbrouner v. Levy.-Filed Dec, 23, 1885.-Wis. SALE OF CHATTEL-CHANGE OF POSSESSION. does not not wihout a change of possessionmay be modified by circumstances. Where machinery had been sold and the parties were in the act of moving it when it was levied on, it is held that the title was in the purchaser and that the levy was wrongful.-Chase, Adm'r v. Garrett.-Filed Oct. 5, 1885.-Pa. SUBSCRIPTION TO STOCK-UNPAID— ACTION FOR BY ADMINISTRATOR.—An action may be maintained by an administrator, for subscription to the capital stock of a savings bauk by his decedent, which remains unpaid, and it is not necssary that a claim for the amount should have been presented for allowance by the court.-Thompson v. Reno S. Bank.-Filed Dec. 1, 1885.-Nev. SUBROGATION-MORTGAGE ANTEDATING A DEED-NOTICE-Where a mortgage has been foreclosed, and the mortgagor pays the bond, he is entitled to subrogation. Where a mortgage antedates the deed to the mortgagor, but was recorded subsequent to the recording of the deed, it is sufficient nottce to a subsequent purchaser. The record is enough to put a prudent man on inquiry. LIMITED. The legislature has power to fix Semon & Terhune.-Filed Oct. 28, 1885. the amount of tax to be raised for public -New Jersey. improvements, and it may exercise this pow DED SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE-FILING AMEN- er directly, or through commissioners. In ABSTRACTS—EQUITABLE RULE.-Spe- either case, its actions are not subject to reeific performance will not be decreed when view in the courts.-Spencer v. Merchant.— the contract is not in good faith, and equit- Filed Dec. 8, 1885.-N. Y. able, and founded on a good and valid consideration. The filing of amended abstracts may be permitted in the discretion of the court, when in equity it is essential to a full presentation of the case but the opposite party must have such notice of the same as equity requires. The rule announced in 51 Ia. 27:54 Ia. 715 and 56 Ia. 302, is not intended for universal application.-Palo Alto v. Harrison.-Filed Dec. 17, 1889. Ia. TAX SALE-WRONG DESCRIPTION-PURCHASER'S LIEN.-Where land is sold for taxes, and in the tax deed the land is mis-described, the purchaser may have a lien for the money paid. The limitation of two years does not bar the inforcement of a lien for moneys thus paid. The burden of proof is on the plaintiff to show that the land was liable to taxation, that it had been assessed, and that the taxes were unpaid.-Scott v. Millikan. SET-OEF-DEPOSITOR CAN SET-OFF HIS-Filed Nov. 24, 1885.-Ind. BALANCE IN BANK AGAINST HIS NOTE IN AD MINISTRATOR'S HANDS.-A banker, at the TAX SALE-ASSESSMENT WRONGFULLY time of his death, held the note of a depos- MADE-EQUITABLE REMEDY.-Where taxes itor for $850 not yet due. The depositor assessed on land, owned by non-residents, had on deposit $752. After the adminis- and listed with non-resident taxes, where it trator was appointed, the depositor tendered should be listed to the tenant or occupant, to him $88, the difference between the and the lands are sold fer taxes, the owner amount of the note and his balance, which may have his remedy in equity, for the rewas refused. The administrator appropri- moval of the cloud thus placed on the title. ated the deposit as a part of decedent's es--Stewart v. Crysler. Filed Nov. 24, tate, and then insisted on the full payment 1885.-N. Y. of the note. In an action on the note it is Held, that the right of set-off existed as to the deposit, at the time of the banker's death, there existed a right of action for the deposit. Skiles, adm'r v. Houston.-Filed Oct. 5, 1885.—Pa. TRUST-CESTUIS QUE TRUST MUST BE CLEARLY DESCRIBED.-In a trust deed where the property was to be held for the use of the ministry and membership of the Methodist Episcopal Church in the United States, Held that this was too vague and indefinite to be upoeld.-Isaacs v. Emory.-Filed Nov. 20, 1885.-Md. STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS—IDENTITY OF DEBT ON A PROMISE TO PAY.—A promise to pay a debt barred by limitation, must be ex- TRIAL-READING PORTIONS OF THE TESplicit and unequivocal. Where it is proved TIMONY TO THE JURY AFTER THEY HAVE that in a certain conversatiou the witness RETIRED.-Where the jury, while deliberheard defendant promise to pay a note, but ating upon the case after submission, call for did not know whether the promise referred the shorthand reporter, who reads to them to the particular note in question, it is such portion of the testimony as they desire, held insufficient to toll the statute.-May- it is ground for error. A married woman faiths appeal.-Filed Oct. 5, 1885.-Pa. who is self-supporting by her own employment, may maintain an action in her own TAXES FOR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT-UN- name, for a persanal injury.-Fleming v. Town of Shenandoah.-Filed Dec. 11, 1885. lien for the taxes thus paid, if he had notice TENANTS IN COMMON ΑΝ ACTION BY ONE ONLY.-Where two persons own a vessel as tenants in common, it is held that an action by one of the owners against the master, for his share of the earnings, cannot be maintained; they should both join. -Stimpson v. Fernald.-Filed Dec. 9, 1885. Maine. SURETIES CONSTRUCTION OF CONTRACT. -A surety will not be held beyond the terms. of his undertaking, and a fair and reasonable construction should be given to their contract. A contract to do certain work on a railroad, without naming the county in OF which the wes to be done, will not be void for uncertainty, and sureties will be held liable on such a contract.-Irwin v. Opp. -Filed Nov. 24, 1885.—Ind. TELEGRAPH COMPANY-LIMITATION LIABILITY BY PRINTED STIPULATIONS ON BLANK.—Where in the transmission of a telegram it is delayed, and the sender loses or suffers damage in consequence thereof, he may recover the amount of the actual dam- TAX ON CORPORATIONS-DEDUCTION OF age, notwithstanding the blank on which he THE VALTATION OF REAL ESTATE.—The capwrote his message contained the usual stip-ital stock of a business corporation, should be ulation, that the company would not be re-assessed at what it is worth, in the judgment sponsible for damages for any amount great- of the commissiouers. The assessed value er than the charges paid for sending, unless the message was repeated.-Thompson v. W. U. Tel. Co.-Filed Dec. 1, 1885.-Wis. of real estate owned by the corporation, should be deducted from the amount of the capital stock.-People v. Asten, et al.-Filed Dec. 8, 1885.-N. Y. TRUSTEE ATTORNEY FORECLOSURE TRIAL-PROVINCE OF THE JURY.-The jury are judges of both the law and fact, and the court cannot ir struct the jury. If SALE. Where a party who is in fact assignee, in a criminal case the court should instruct sells property as attorney for the assignor, it the jury to the predjudice of the defendant, he is entitled to a remedy by appeal.—Swann v. State.-Filed Dec. 18, 1885.-Md. will not invalidate the sale. Where the notice of sale,was correct in all respects, except the omission of the name of the town where the property is situated and where a fair price is realized, the sale will not be set aside, on the ground that the notice of sale was Dickerson v. Small. Filed defective. Dec. 11, 1885.—Md. TAXES UNLAWFUL SEIZURE BY COLLECTOR-LIABILITY OF CITY.-Where a tax collector unlawfully seized property and sold it for taxes, the owner may maintain an action against the collector for the tortuous act, but cannot have an action against the city. The money being paid into the city treasury RAILROAD——— without notice from whom it was collected, would not bind the city.-Everson v. City of Syracuse.-Filed Dec. 8, 1885.-N.Y. COVERY OF TAXES PAID BY PURCHASER. --- --- OF TAXATION-LANDS GRANTED IN AID FORFEITURE.- Where public lands were granted in aid of a railroad company on condition that the road be constructed within a given time, and the road was not completed until one year or more after the TAXATION--VOID JUDICIAL SALE--RE- limitation, Held that as no action to compel a forfeiture had been commenced and as the One who purchases land at a judiclal sale company had performed all the conditions which is subsequently declared void, may except as to time of completion, that an recover taxes paid by him. A grantee of equitable title to the lands vested in the the owner of the land takes it subject to a company,upon completion of the road, and |