Imágenes de páginas



Acceptance of Checks. See Banks.


See Criminal Law, 5, 6.


1. REFORM PROCEDURE, Equitable Actions Maintainable Under
Whenever There is an Absence of Legal Remedy.-Under the con-
stitution and statutes of Idaho, equitable jurisdiction exists and will
be exercised in all cases and under all circumstances where the remedy
at law is not adequate, competent and certain, so as to meet all the
requirements of justice. That there is a legal remedy is not sufficient
unless in all respects as satisfactory as the relief furnished by a court
of equity. (Idaho) Coleman v. Jaggers, 207.

2. REFORM PROCEDURE-Abolition of Distinction Between
Law and Equity, Objects of.-One of the objects of the provision
of the constitution of Idaho abolishing all distinctions between ac-
tions at law and suits in equity, and giving the district courts juris-
diction both at law and in equity, was to rid our system of the
multiplicity of suits and vexatious and cumbersome procedure, and to
give litigants full and complete relief in a single action, where, under
the old practice, several suits were necessary to accomplish that re-
sult. (Idaho) Coleman v. Jaggers, 207.

See Wills, 20, 21.


1. ADOPTION-By What Nations Recognized.-The adoption by
one person of the children of another was unknown to the common
law of England but it was recognized by the law of Rome and many
other ancient nations. (Mo.) Hockaday v. Lynn, 672.

2. ADOPTION—Strict and Liberal Construction.-Statutes of
adoption are construed strictly against the adopted child, but the act
of adoption is construed liberally in his favor. (Mo.) Hockaday v.
Lynn, 672.

3. ADOPTION-Right of Inheritance in General.-Consanguinity
is so fundamental in statutes of succession that it can be ignored by
construction only when courts are forced to do so, either by the terms
of express statutes or by inexorable implication. (Mo.) Hockaday
v. Lynn, 672.

4. ADOPTION-Inheritance from Collateral Kindred.—An adopted
child does not inherit from the broth of her deceased adopting par-

ent the share which such parent would have inherited had he sur-
vived his brother. (Mo.) Hockaday v. Lynn, 672.


Adoption of Children. See Children.



PURE FOOD LAWS-Application.-A preparation sold
"food" and labeled that, though it is not sold as a feeding stuff,
that it fattens and improves stock, is subject to regulation under
a pure food statute applying to all "condimental stock foods, pat-
ented and proprietary stock foods, claimed to possess nutritive prop
erties and all other materials intended for feeding to domestic ani-
mals." (Mich.) Pratt Food Co. v. Bird, 601.


ADVERSE POSSESSION-Parent and Child.-If a child hold-
ing a deed to a tract of land dies without having entered into pos-
session, and thereafter her father, living on a different tract, takes
possession and holds it until his death, when other of his children
enter into possession, it will not be presumed that the father en-
tered into possession in behalf of such other children, without evi-
dence that he professed to do so, nor that they had any title, or at
most only color of title, and his possession will not inure to them
and perfect any colorable title they may have had as against a
stranger holding a deed to the land. (N. C.) Barrett v. Brewer, 787.

[blocks in formation]

Alimony, ne exeat, issuing of writs of in proceedings for, 993.


ANIMALS-Liability for Damage Caused by.-The owner of
an animal is responsible for the damage he has caused, and the pre-
sumption is that the owner of the animal is in fault, the burden be-
ing on him to show that he was without the slightest fault and did
all that was possible to prevent the injury. (La.) Damonte v. Pat-
ton, 384.

See Highways, 3-5.


1. APPEAL "Person Interested."-An Administrator de bonis
non directed by the probate court to pay a sum of money to a cer-
tain person is "a person interested" in the decree of such court
appointing an administrator of the estate of the person to whom

such payment is directed to be made, but whom the administrator
de bonis non claims is still alive, so that such administrator is en-
titled to an appeal therefrom. (Vt.) In re Clark's Estate, 938.

2. APPEAL "Person Interested."-A "person interested,"
within the meaning of a statute allowing an appeal from a decree
of the probate court, is one who has some legal right, or is under
some legal liability, that may be enlarged or diminished by the de-
cree. (Vt.) In re Clark's Estate, 938.

3. APPEAL-Agreed Statement of Facts.-If a case is submitted
on an agreed statement of facts, no point of law can be examined
not arising on the facts stated, nor can the allegation of any fact,
not found in such statement, receive attention. (La.) Garner v.
Freeman, 361.

4. APPEAL-Amendment of Judgment.-A judgment as between
coappellees alone cannot be disturbed or amended on appeal. (La.)
Garner v. Freeman, 361.

5. APPEAL-Bringing Up Evidence.-A judgment will not be
affirmed because the bill of exceptions fails to show affirmatively that
it contains all the evidence, if it contains enough to show affirmatively
that the court's finding was erroneous. (Ark.) Wadly v. Leggitt,

6. APPEAL AND ERROR-Appealable Orders.-The refusal of
the chancellor to grant a new trial of an issue at law as directed by
him in a suit to quiet title to land is an appealable order. (N. J.
Eq.) Brady v. Carteret Realty Co., 778.


APPEAL AND ERROR.-A defendant is not bound to ex-
cept to an instruction which there is no evidence to warrant, and he
has already moved to dismiss the action. (N. C.) Barrett v. Brewer,

See New Trial.


1. ASSIGNMENT FOR CREDITORS-Rights of Creditors.-The
rights of creditors of an assigned estate are fixed at the date of the
assignment, and only those who are creditors of the assignor at that
date are entitled to participate in the distribution of the proceeds
of the estate. (Pa.) Chestnut Street Trust etc. Company's As-
signed Estate, 909.

2. ASSIGNMENT FOR CREDITORS.-A Creditor is one who has
a definite demand against the estate, or a cause of action capable of
adjustment and liquidation upon the trial. (Pa.) Chestnut Street
Trust etc. Company's Assigned Estate, 909.

3. ASSIGNMENT FOR CREDITORS-Debts Collectible.-Debts
due in praesenti and payable in futuro are claims against the as-
signor for the benefit of his creditors, for which his estate is liable
in the hands of his assignee, and so, also, are damages resulting
from the breach of a contract occurring prior to assignment. (Pa.)
Chestnut Street Trust etc. Company's Assigned Estate, 909.

4. ASSIGNMENT FOR CREDITORS-Debts not Existing or Con-
tingent at Date of Assignment.-Generally, any claim or demand
against an assignor for the benefit of his creditors which is certain,
or may be reduced to a certainty at the date of the assignment, is
a debt payable out of the assigned estate, but a claim against the
assignor arising after the date of the assignment will not be allowed
to participate in the distribution of his estate, and the possibility of

Am. St. Rep., Vol. 118-67

a claim, depending upon the happening of a contingency in the future,
will not constitute a demand for which the assigned estate is liable.
(Pa.) Chestnut Street Trust etc. Company's Assigned Estate, 909.
ditional Bond does not create an indebtedness absolutely payable
in the future, but is an obligation which becomes an indebtedness
on the happening of a contingency, and until such contingency hap-
pens, there is no claim or demand which can be enforced against
an assignor for the benefit of creditors, or against his estate. (Pa.)
Chestnut Street Trust etc. Company's Assigned Estate, 909.

6. ASSIGNMENT FOR CREDITORS-Debts Collectible-Guard-
ian and Ward.-If a trust company assigns for the benefit of cred-
itors, delivering to its assignee all of its general assets, but retain-
ing and continuing to administer its trust funds, and thereafter
funds held by it as surety for a guardian are stolen by one of its
officers, the ward in favor of whom no liability has yet accrued can-
not participate as a general creditor in the distribution of the funds
in the hands of the assignee for the benefit of creditors. (Pa.)
Chestnut Street Trust etc. Company's Assigned Estate, 909.


See Landlord and Tenant, 6, 7.

See Criminal Law, 3, 4.

See Infants, 1.


See Highways, 6-8.


1. A BAILOR may Recover of His Bailee for the Latter's Con-
version of the thing bailed. (Conn.) Barker v. Lewis Storage etc.
Co., 141.

2. A BAILEE is Estopped from Denying the Title of His Bailors,
no paramount title having intervened. (Conn.) Barker v. Lewis
Storage etc. Co., 141.

See Warehousemen.


See Chattel Mortgages, 4-6.


1. BANKS AND BANKING—Acceptance of Check by Drawee.-
A telegraphic inquiry, "Is J. F. Donald's check on you for $350
good?' responded to by telegraph that, "J. F. Donald's check is
good for the sum named," is not an absolute promise to pay, and
does not constitute an unqualified acceptance of the check. (Kan.)
First Nat. Bank v. Commercial Savings Bank, 340.

2. BANKS AND BANKING-Acceptance of Check by Drawee.-
The drawee of a bank check cannot be held liable upon a claimed
contract of acceptance external to the bill, unless the language used
clearly and unequivocally imports an absolute promise to pay. (Kan.)
First Nat. Bank v. Commercial Savings Bank, 340.

3. BANKS AND BANKING-Discount of Note-Bona Fide
Holder.-If a bank discounts paper for a depositor and gives him
credit upon its books for the proceeds thereof, it is not a bona fide
holder for value so as to be protected against infirmities in the paper,
so long as no part of the deposit is drawn or the balance of the ac-
count exceeds the proceeds of the discounted paper, unless, in addi-
tion to the mere fact of crediting the depositor with the proceeds
of the paper, some other and valuable consideration passes. (Minn.)
Union Nat. Bank v. Winsor, 641.

4. BANKS AND BANKING-Discount of Depositor's Paper-
Bona Fide Holder.-If a bank discounts a note for its depositor and
gives him credit on its books for the proceeds, it becomes a bona
fide purchaser of the note for value so as to protect it against in-
firmities in the paper, if, before it receives notice of such infirmities,
it pays to the depositor or to his order an amount which reduces
his deposit to a sum less than was placed to his credit, as the pro-
ceeds of the note. (Minn.) Security Bank of Minnesota v. Pe-
truschke, 644.


See Bills and Notes.

Banks, acceptance of check, strictly speaking there can be none, 348.
check upon, acceptance of by bank, effect of, 349, 350.
check upon, acceptance of how may be made and evidenced, 351.
check upon, acceptance of, statutes controlling, 351.

check upon, acceptance of, when results from telegrams, 350, 351.
check upon, effect of as an assignment, 349.

check upon, is not presentable for acceptance but only for pay-
ment, 348.

check upon, is revocable, 349, 350.

check upon, not yet issued, what amounts to an acceptance of,

check upon, promise by bank to accept, how may be sued upon,

check upon, promise by bank to pay, effect of, 351.

check upon, promise by bank to pay, what amounts to, 352.

check upon, refusing by bank, effect of, 348.

check upon, response made by bank to inquiry whether check is
good, effect of, 349.

check upon, what is a, 348.


MARRIAGE-Proof of-Legitimacy of Child.-In the absence
of all proof of marriage, and in the face of an absolute denial by
defendant, the legitimacy of a child will not be presumed, where
one of the parties to the suit is a party to such asserted marriage and
makes no attempt to prove it. (La.) Lynch v. Knoop, 391.

See Death, 4-6.


BIGAMY-Belief that Wife is Dead.-An honest belief, based
upon reasonable grounds by a husband that his wife is dead, is no

« AnteriorContinuar »