MULTIFARIOUSNESS. 297(3) (U.S.C.C.A.) Where injured employé VI. WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION ACTS. MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS. See Taxation. IX. PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS. (C) Contracts. (A) Nature and Grounds of Master's Lia-354 (U.S.C.C.A.) A contractor with a city bility. 346 (U.S.C.C.A.) Recovery by an injured for the construction of a canal held not entitled XI. USE AND REGULATION OF PUB- (A) Streets and Other Public Ways. 347 (U.S.C.C.A.) Laws Wash. 1911, c. 74, Laws Wash. 1911, c. 74, providing for com- 358 (U.S.C.C.A.) That defendant railroad run down by a team of horses, the questions XIII. FISCAL MANAGEMENT, PUB- (C) Bonds and Other Securities, and Sink- For cases in Dec. Dig. & Am. Dig. Key No. Series & Indexes see same topic and KEY-NUMBER NOVATION. See Contracts, 240, 248. PATENTS. II. PATENTABILITY. (A) Invention. See Appeal and Error, 194, 231, 719; Crim-21 (U.S.C.C.A.) A patent for the use of inal Law, 1043. OBJECTIONS. OFFICERS. one chemical element as a material does not necessarily anticipate a later patent for the use of another element, although of the same group, for the same purpose.-General Electric Co. v. Laco-Philips Co., 166. See Banks and Banking; Clerks of Courts; Corporations, 310, 563; Judges; Municipal 26(1) (U.S.C.C.A.) It is not invention mere. Corporations, 950; Receivers. OPINION EVIDENCE. See Criminal Law, 449; Evidence, 4982. OPTIONS. See Principal and Agent, 129. See Infants. PAROL EVIDENCE. See Evidence, 416, 441. PARTIES. ly to combine into one unitary structure me. chanism formerly made in separate pieces, so long as each element operates in the same way to produce the same result.-Ft. Pitt Supply Co. v. Ireland & Matthews Mfg. Co., 65. a to 27(1) (U.S.C.C.A.) The application closed car of the form of wind shield known on open cars held double use.-Rauch & Lang Carriage Co. v. Hanlon, 481. 28 (U.S.C.C.A.) To sustain a design patent, the design must involve invention, and not mere ly the skill of the art.-Steffens v. Steiner, 56. 34 (U.S.C.C.A.) All elements of the prior art, whether embodied in one or more structures, have a bearing upon the question whether there is invention in the device of a patent.-Ft. Pitt Supply Co. v. Ireland & Matthews Mfg. Co., 65. For parties to particular proceedings or instru-36 (U.S.C.C.A.) The question whether ments, see also the various specific topics. I. PLAINTIFFS. (A) Persons Who may or must Sue. 7(1) (U.S.C.C.A.) A defendant held merely a stakeholder, and not a real party in interest. -General Electric Co. v. Richardson, 154. PARTITION. II. ACTIONS FOR PARTITION. a patent involves invention is one of fact, to be answered in the light of all pertinent considerations, including the prior art.-Zimmerman v. Advance Machinery Co., 60. 36 (U.S.C.C.A.) The question of invention is at the last one of fact.-Ft. Pitt Supply Co. v. Ireland & Matthews Mfg. Co., 65. III. PERSONS ENTITLED TO PAT- 93 (U.S.C.C.A.) Right to patents for inventions, made while the inventor was in the em (B) Proceedings and Relief. 109(1) (U.S.C.C.A.) Where contingent remaindermen were not made parties to a parti-ployment of another, determined under the contion suit, though life tenants were, a sale for tract between them.-Brown Perfection Tube Co. v. Brown, 484. partition disposes only of life estates, and not fee.-Glover v. Bradley, 487. PARTNERSHIP. See Corporations, II. THE FIRM, ITS NAME, POWERS IX. CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION (B) Limitation of Claims. 64 (U.S.C.C.A.) A contract by a partnership, signed "Lakeside Dredging Company" by the partners, held not invalid, under Pub. Acts 176 (U.S.C.C.A.) A patent for a new prodMich. 1907, No. 101, where it showed the names uct of great utility, which also describes operaof the partners and that they were doing busi- tive means for obtaining it, is not invalidated ness under such company name.-Carland v. by the fact that later another and better way Heckler, 390. of manufacturing it is found.-General Electric Co. v. Laco-Philips Co., 166. See Carriers. PASSENGERS. PATENT OFFICE. See Patents, 168. 176 (U.S.C.C.A.) A general arrangement of parts, fully described in the specification, and without which the whole device is inoperative, will be deemed to have been contemplated by the patentee, and to that extent may be read into a claim, although not named therein.Hauser Awning Arm Co. v. Anton, 268. X. TITLE, CONVEYANCES, AND CON- (C) Licenses and Contracts. 216 (U.S.C.C.A.) Where defendant refused to accept machinery specially manufactured to his order and having no market price, held that, though title had not passed, plaintiff might recover the contract price.-Fisher Hydraulic Stone & Machinery Co. v. Warner, 413. XII. INFRINGEMENT. (C) Suits in Equity. 322 (U.S.C.C.A.) On a new hearing before a master to state an account of profits made by an infringer, defendant held not estopped to show mistakes in its report of sales received in evidence on the former hearing.-Westinghouse Electric & Mfg. Co. v. Wagner Electric Mfg. Co., 518. On setting aside the report of a master on an accounting for profits against an infringer, for failure to consider evidence offered, the proper practice held to be to recommit the case for further hearing.—Id. PAYMENT. See Bankruptcy, 325; Banks and Banking, 262; Principal and Surety, 97; Sales, 194; Subrogation. PERSONAL INJURIES. See Carriers; Equity, 87; Insurance, PETITION. See Bankruptcy, 84; Drains, 28. PHYSICIANS AND SURGEONS. See Master and Servant, 92; Release, 58. PLEADING. See Indictment and Information. V. DEMURRER OR EXCEPTION. 324(6) (U.S.C.C.A.) Remand of an infringement suit on reversal, with directions for a new hearing before a master on the question 214(1) (U.S.C.C.A.) A demurrer to the anof profits, held to open the case for a full new hearing under the original reference.-Westing-tained.-Sierra v. United States, 107. house Electric & Mfg. Co. v. Wagner Electric Mfg. Co., 518. swer admits all averments of fact therein con over XIII. DEFECTS AND OBJECTIONS, WAIVER, AND AIDER BY VERDICT OR JUDGMENT. 406(3) (U.S.C.C.A.) Pleading by a bankrupt after the overruling of his demurrer to a petition of creditors held a waiver of any error in such ruling. (Per Smith, Circuit Judge.)-Pollack v. Meyer Bros. Drug Co., 535. PLEDGES. See Brokers, 8; Principal and Surety, ~ 15. POSSESSION. 56 See Adverse Possession. 1,009,616. Process of converting glue, held void 1,018,502. Incandescent bodies for electric lamps, held not anticipated, valid and infringed..... REISSUED. 13,653. Shield for car windows, held void 60 166 for lack of invention..... . . . . . 481 POST OFFICE. See Criminal Law, 323. III. OFFENSES AGAINST POSTAL LAWS. 35 (U.S.C.C.A.) The use of the mails in furtherance of a scheme to defraud may constitute an offense under Criminal Code, § 215, although the scheme had no relation to the laws of the United States, and the use of the mails was incidental and unpremeditated.-Hendrey v. United States, 75. a 35 (U.S.C.C.A.) Where, by organizing corporation, accused intended to defraud stockholders, the legality of the corporation's object and charter purpose is no defense to prosecution for using the mails in connection with the scheme to defraud.-Watlington v. United States, 253. Where accused used the mails to dispose of corporate stock, and subsequently appropriated For cases in Dec. Dig. & Am. Dig. Key No. Series & Indexes see same topic and KEY-NUMBER the property of the corporation, he is not guilty of using the mails with intent to defraud, unless there was a fraudulent intent at the time the mails were used.-Id. 48(2) (U.S.C.C.A.) In a prosecution under Criminal Code, § 211, for mailing a letter containing information relating to the procuring of an abortion, the indictment held sufficient. Wetzel v. United States, 658. II. MUTUAL RIGHTS, DUTIES, AND (B) Compensation and Lien of Agent. 82 (U.S.C.C.A.) A contract under which goods were furnished to an agent for sale construed, and commissions to which the agent was entitled determined.-Miller Rubber Co. V. Citizens' Trust & Savings Bank, 374. 48(4) (U.S.C.C.A.) An indictment for using the mails in execution of a scheme to defraud III. RIGHTS AND LIABILITIES AS TO construed.-Hendrey v. United States, 75. THIRD PERSONS. (A) Powers of Agent. 49 (U.S.C.C.A.) On trial of a prosecution for using the mails in aid of a scheme to defraud, the scope of the evidence admissible to 119(1) (U.S.C.C.A.) An agent is presumed establish the scheme rests largely in the discretion of the trial judge.-Hendrey v. United States, 75. Evidence held erroneously admitted as against some of the defendants in a prosecution for using the mails to defraud.-Id. 49 (U.S.C.C.A.) In prosecution for using the mails in aid of a scheme to defraud, letters written to accused by his victims held admissible.-Watlington v. United States, 253. POWERS. See Principal and Agent, 28. PRACTICE. a general agent, contracting within the scope of his authority, and, as regards third persons, the nature of the authority bestowed, rather than the instructions, governs.-Swift & Co. v. Detroit Rock Salt Co., 237. 129 (U.S.C.C.A.) Where the holder of an option to purchase paintings agreed with defendant to purchase them for defendant's benefit, defendant furnishing the purchase price, the holder of the option is bound, on completing the purchase, to transfer the paintings to defendant.-McKey v. Clark, 602. For practice in particular actions and proceed- estopped from questioning authority of agent, ings, see the various specific topics. PRECEDENTS. See Courts, 372, 406. PREFERENCES. See Bankruptcy, 159-186, 303, 311. PRESCRIPTION. See Adverse Possession; Limitation of Actions. PRESUMPTIONS. See Appeal and Error, 928, 932; Attorney and Client, 70; Criminal Law, 323; Evidence, 82. PRINCIPAL AND AGENT. See Attorney and Client; Banks and Bank- I. THE RELATION. (A) Creation and Existence. 28 (U.S.C.C.A.) Where one entitled to share in estate executed power of attorney to enable his counsel to close up the estate, attorney cannot, over 20 years after power was given, convey lands belonging to estate which beneficiary had seen, declared to be worthless, and had abandoned.-Milwee v. Waddleton, 663. who apparently recognized contract.-Swift & Co. v. Detroit Rock Salt Co., 237. PRINCIPAL AND SURETY. See Appeal and Error, 1073; Courts, I. CREATION AND EXISTENCE OF (A) Between Individuals. 15 (U.S.C.C.A.) Where securities belonging to a customer of brokers were pledged by them to secure their own debt, the customer, though the brokers' debts, for, in case the security the pledge was authorized, was not a surety for was insufficient to discharge them, no personal liability attached.-Robinson v. Roe, 610. III. DISCHARGE OF SURETY. federal contractor held injured by the contrac97 (U.S.C.C.A.) A surety on the bond of a tor's failure to make part payments to a subcontractor, and by the subcontractor's failure to insist on receiving such payments and receipt of notes.-American Bonding Co. of Baltimore v. United States, 300. 99 (U.S.C.C.A.) Where the measure of a surety's liability is fixed, any change will, as to an individual surety, relieve from liability; but the rule is otherwise as to a commercial surety, who must show injury by the change to be relieved.-American Bonding Co. of Baltimore v. United States, 300. IV. REMEDIES OF CREDITORS. PROVISIONAL REMEDIES. 143 (U.S.C.C.A.) A surety may usually set See Appeal and Error, 954, 955. up any defense of which his principal could take advantage.-American Bonding Co. of Baltimore v. United States, 300. V. RIGHTS AND REMEDIES OF (A) As to Creditor. PUBLIC DEBT. See Municipal Corporations, ~950. PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS. PUBLIC LANDS. 172 (U.S.C.C.A.) Where claims against See Municipal Corporations, 354. surety exceeded amount of penalty of bond, surety may sue in equity to secure pro rata distribution of amount of penalty between several claimants.-American Surety Co. of New York II. v. Mills, 35. (B) As to Principal. 185 (U.S.C.C.A.) Where claim added by amendment to petition was satisfied by sale of collateral, sureties may recover amount paid by them to satisfy judgment on the claim of which principal had notice, though no notice of amendment was given.-Cooper v. Jewett, 426. SURVEY AND DISPOSAL OF LANDS (H) Grants in Aid of Railroads. (I) Proceedings in Land Office. 187 (U.S.C.C.A.) Under Code Iowa 1897. §§ 3773, 3779, 3966, 3967, the court, in an action against principal and his sureties, held to have102 (U.S.C.C.A.) Where plaintiff did not jurisdiction to determine the respective liability of the parties.-Cooper v. Jewett, 426. appeal from an order requiring him to furnish proof showing he was head of a family, and failed to furnish such proof within time fixed, he cannot, the land having been patented to another, object.-Fisher v. Rule, 55. 103(1) (U.S.C.C.A.) Plaintiff, who was not a party to a contest by his father against the entry of defendant on public lands, can take no 159, advantage of his father's contest upon claiming the land under a subsequent entry.-Fisher v. Rule, 55. 344; Execution; Mandamus; II. SERVICE. (E) Return and Proof of Service. PUBLIC SERVICE CORPORATIONS. PUBLIC WATER SUPPLY. 149 (U.S.C.C.A.) Evidence held to show that See Waters and Water Courses. defendant was served in an Iowa suit in accordance with Code Iowa 1897, § 3516, authorizing service of process by any person not a party to the action.-Cooper v. Jewett, 426. PUNISHMENT. See Injunction, ~232. For cases in Dec. Dig. & Am. Dig. Key No. Series & Indexes see same topic and KEY-NUMBER |