Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

on

was

V.

em 160 (Ky.) Credits notes and under

(C) Termination and Discharge. standing of parties held to suspend running of Cw21 (Mo. App.) Contract of employment limitations.-Kennedy v. Kennedy, 182.

held for indefinite period terminable at will. -

Ogden v. Atlas Brewing Co., 644. v. PLEADING, EVIDENCE, TRIAL, AND REVIEW.

III. MASTER'S LIABILITY FOR INJURIES Om 178 (Tex.Civ.App.) Surety's suit on note

TO SERVANT. executed by guardian to replace money con (C) Methods of Work, Rules, and Orders. verted held not barred.-Fidelity & Deposit Co. em 137(6) (Mo.) That switchman

not of Maryland v. Risien, 1105.

member of crew of engine by which injured held em 195 (6) (Ky.) If payments suspending run. immaterial to recovery.-Laughlin v. Missouri ning of limitations are denied, burden of proof Pac. R. Co., 949. on holder.-Kennedy v. Kennedy, 182.

(E) Fellow Servants. LIQUOR SELLING.

Omw180(1) (Mo.) Defense of fellow employee's See Intoxicating Liquors.

negligence not available, where employee injur

ed in interstate commerce.-Laughlin v. MisLOGS AND LOGGING.

souri Pac. R. Co., 949.

Om 185(9) (Ky.) Duty to furnish reasonably Cu3(13) (Ark.) Conduct of vendors in failing safe machinery nondelegable.-Green River to declare forfeiture held to estop vendors from Light & Water Co. v. Beeler, 201. asserting, a lien upon logs manufactured into lumber by purchaser from vendee.-Henry

(F) Risks Assumed by Servant. Quellmalz Lumber & Mfg. Co. v. Briney, 290.

Where vendor of timber is estopped from as- no 204(1) (Mo.) Defense of assumption of serting lien against purchaser of lumber from risk not available, where employee injured in vendee, purchaser derives right to possession interstate commerce.-Laughlin Missouri of lumber manufactured out of such timber Pac. R. Co., 949. from vendee, and not from quitclaim deed from Cm 217(2) (Ky.) Appreciation of risk, and vendor.-Id.

not knowledge of defect, bars recovery.-Webb m3(14) (Ky.) Purchaser of trees has no v. Elkhorn Mining Corporation, 844. right to those not removed within time prescribed by contract.-Maynard v. Farley, 1022.

(H) Actions. Purchaser of trees cannot recover consideration paid for those he failed to remove in time. Cam?64(2) (Mo.App.) Pleading held to render

admissible evidence of master's knowledge of -Id.

defect.-Laemore v. Lehrack, 639. Cw3(15) (Ky.) Answer to petition to quiet title to trees held insufficient.--Maynard v. Far-em265(13) (Ky.). Operator of machine pre

sumed to assume risks.-Webb v. Elkhorn Minley, 1022.

ing Corporation, 844. LUNATICS.

276(1) (Mo.) Evidence held sufficient to See Insane Persons.

show employee and railroad engaged in inter-
state commerce.-Laughlin v. Missouri Pac. R.

Co., 949.
MALICIOUS MISCHIEF.

m276(3) (Ky.) Presence of refuse under Cum 9 (Téx.Cr.App.) Evidence held sufficient coal cutting machine held not proximate cause

warrant conviction for defacing "public of injury.-Webb v. Elkhorn Mining Corporabuilding" while confined in jail.-Haag v. State, tion, 844. 1075.

Cm 278(18) (Mo.) Evidence held sufficient to

establish negligence of engineer after being sig. MALICIOUS PROSECUTION. naled by switchman to stop for purpose of

boarding engine.—Laughlin v. Missouri Pac. R. V. ACTIONS.

Co., 949. On 49 (Ark.) Complaint must allege want of Cw284(3): (Mo.App.) Negligence of employee probable cause.-Songee v. Jones & Green, 289. acting outside the scope of employment in pickCm66 (Ark.) Measure of damages for deten- ing up defective insulated wire held question tion of attached property stated.--Sonsee v. for jury.-Hollis v. Kansas City Light & Power Jones & Green, 280.

Co., 634. cm 67 (Ark.) Compensatory damages for m286 (20) (Mo. App.) Negligent insulation wrongful attachment recoverable only in ac- held a jury question.--Hollis v. Kansas City tion to dissolve.-Sonsee v. Jones & Green, 289. Light & Power Co., 634.

Damages for injury to credit recoverable in Em288(5) (Ky.) Testimony servant did not separate action.-Id.

appreciate risk of operatirg unguarded coal

cutting machine does not take case to the jury. MANSLAUGHTER.

--Webb v. Elkhorn Mining Corporation, 844. See Homicide.

www289 (4) (Mo.App.) Employé may rely upon

superior knowledge of master.-Laemore v. MARRIAGE.

Lehrack, 639. See Breach of Marriage Promise; Divorce; Em 289(19) (Mo.App.) Contributory negligence Husband and Wife.

in picking up defective insulated wire held ques.
tion for jury.-Hollis v. Kansas City Light &

Power Co., 634.
MASTER AND SERVANT.
C289(19) (Mo. App.) Contributory

negliSee Trade Unions.

gence of employé injured by falling derrick held

for jury.-Laemore v. Lebrack, 639. I. THE RELATION.

www289(35) (Mo.App.) Negligence of electro(A) Creation and Existence.

cuted steam shovel operator for jury.-Hollis

v. Kansas City Light & Power Co., 634. w3(2) (Ky.) Ambiguous contract can be giv-C291 (4) (Mo.App.) Instruction on liability en meaning given it by parties.---Piercy v. Lou- for injury from fallen electric wire held error. isville & N. Ry. Co., 1042.

-Hollis v. Kansas City Light & Power Co., Interdivisional rule held construed by parties 634. as contended for by plaintiff.-Id.

C293(19) (Mo.) Charge on negligence of enwww.7 (Ky.) Order affecting one run held not gineer in failing to stop on signal of switchman modification of seniority rights of conductors. to board engine held not erroneous.-Laughlin -Pierey v. Louisville & N. Ry. Co., 1012. v. Missouri Pac. R. Co., 949.

to

[ocr errors]

а

For cases in Dec.Dig. & Am.Dig. Key-No.Series & Indexes see same topic and KEY-NUMBER
IV. LIABILITIES FOR INJURIES TO permit held entitled to subsequent permit cop-
THIRD PERSONS.

ering same land.-Id.
(A) Acts or omissions of Servant,

Public land commissioner issuing oil and gas

lease presumed to waive failure to develop unCa 302(1) (Mo.App.) Whether act of servant der permit.-Id. within scope of employment determined by facts in particular case.--Noland v. Morris & Co., II. TITLE, CONVEYANCES, AND 627.

CONTRAC'I S.
Fact that employee's act hindered, rather (A) Rights and Remedies of Owners.
than aided, master's business, immaterial as
to whether done within scope of employment. from surface such as the nature of the proper-

Cm 49 (Ky.) Possession of minerals separate
-Id.
Em306 (Mo.App.) Master liable for malicious ty admits is sufficient.--Asher v. Gibson, 862.
tort of servant acting within scope of employ- acquisition of title to minerals.-Id.

Interruptions of possession held to prevent ment.-Noland v. Morris & Co., 627.

Possession of surface under absolute deed is (C) Actions.

not adverse possession of severed minerals.

-Id. C332(2) (Mo.App.) Whether servant's tort within scope of employment held for jury.-No- of coal by plaintiffs.-Asher v. Gibson, 862.

50 (Ky.) Petition held to allege ownership land v. Morris & Co., 627. Fact that employee's tort result of erroneous

(B) Conveyances in General. execution of foreman's order cannot affect ques: 55(1) (Ky.) May be separated from, surtion of whether within scope of employment, as face by reservation.-Asher v. Gibson, 862. question for jury.-Id.

(C) Leases, Licenses, and Contracts. VI. WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION ACTS. (A) Nature and Grounds of Master's Lia- month of deed conveying land as part consid

058 (Ky.) Receipt and retention for bility.

eration for lease held to create presumption m375(2) (Tex.Com.App.) Injury to employé of acceptance.-Hogg v. Forsythe, 1008. boarding train to return home held in "course ww58 (Tex.civ.App.) Evidence held not to of employment,". within Compensation Act.- show agency between lessees so as to impute to Western Indemnity Co. v. Leonard, 655. one knowledge of other as to mistake in lease.

-Dale v. Simon, 703. (C) Proceedings.

Agency or partnership between signers of Ow405(5) (Ky.) Evidence held to sustain lease held not to work estoppel to deny validiboard's finding parents were not dependent on ty.-Id. deceased employee.-Hagan v. Mason-Hanger Om66 (Ky.) Coal lease held to permit forfeiConst. Co., 896.

ture only on concurrence of three conditions. Om417(7) (Ky.) Board's finding parents were --Hogg y. Forsythe, 1008. not dependent on deceased employee conclusive

Statute authorizing forfeiture of term for on courts.-Hagan v. Mason-Hanger Const. Co., assignment does not apply to coal lease with 896.

option to buy.-Id. MECHANICS' LIENS.

Cm68(1) (Ky.) Answer alleging lessor's con

sent to assignment and release of lessee held II. RIGHT TO LIEN.

to state defense to action for rent, in lieu of (0) Agreement or Consent of Owner. operation.-Lockhart v. Atwood, 843. Su 71 (Ky.) Married woman, knowing of im- ww70(4) (Ky.) Lessor held to have waived provement on separate property, bound for right to forfeit coal mining lease.--Hogg v. Formaterial ordered by husband.-Mingo Lime & sythe: 1008: Lumber Co. v. Parsley, 169.

C70(5) (Ky.) Royalties on coal mined by ww73(3) (Ky.) Materialman's lien may be en

lessee are rents.--Caudill Coal Co. v. Solper forced against property of married woman,

Mining Co., 533. although written contract therefor not signed four months applies to liens of third parties.

Priority of statutory lien for rent for past by her.-Mingo Lime & Lumber Co. v. Parsley, 169.

-Id.

Cm73!2 (Ky.) Oil "produced,” to continue III. PROCEEDINGS TO PERFECT. lease, must be in quantity susceptible of divi136(1) (Tex.civ.App.) Affidavit need not 7812) (Tex.Civ.App.) Oil and gas

sion.--Enfield v. Woods, 842,

lease describe land on which personalty situated. Theld not ambiguous so as to prevent construcMoore v. Carey Bros. Oil Co., 470.

tion by court as to rentals to be paid to preIV. OPERATION AND EFFECT.

vent forfeiture.-Dale v. Simon, 703.

Om78(3) (Ky.) Notice to develop held suffi(C) Priority.

cient where lessee was holding for speculation. 197 (Tox.Civ.App.) Purchaser before lien-United Fuel Gas Co. V. Adams, 841. fixed takes subject to lien.-Moore v. Carey Bros. Oil Co., 470.

III. OPERATION OF MINES, QUARRIES,

AND WELLS.
VII. ENFORCEMENT.

(C) Rights and Liabilities Incident to

Working. ww304(1). (Ky.) Materialman held entitled to w 109 (Ky.) In action for breach of mining personal 'judgment against married woman.- contract, instructions held as favorable to deMingo Lime & Lumber Co. v. Parsley, 169.

fendant as it could ask.-Mammoth Blue Gem

Coal Co. v. Elswick, 240.
MINES AND MINERALS.

Evidence as to profits which would have been
I. PUBLIC MINERAL LANDS.

made on broken contract held to sustain ver

dict.-Id. (A) Reservation and Disposal in General.

Cmw 109 (Ky.) Petitions held to sustain judgEu 5 (Tex.Civ.App.) Invalidity of oil and gas ment for lost profits from drilling wells.-Cadpermits and leases on public school land held illac Oil & Gas Co. v. Robert Lovelace & Co., not shown.-Bynum v. Colquitt, 720.

883. Purchaser of public school land could not take Extra work under well-drilling contract held advantage of defective previous relinquishment not to include drilling out plugged hole.--Id, of oil and gas permit the state not complain Evidence held to sustain amount of damages ing.-Id.

aw'rded for breach of contract to drill wells. Persons interested in relinquished oil and gas -Id.

Taxes.

MINORS.

fatally defective.-State ex inf. Barrett ex rel. See Infants.

Ryan v. Huffman, 985.
MONEY PAID.

Cin 18 (Mo.App.) Relators in proceedings to ol (Tex.Civ.App.) Liability for money paid estopped by fact that they voted at city elec

test validity of incorporation of town held not another for repair bill of locomotive held not tion. --State ex inf. Barrett ex rel. Ryan v. established.-Lancaster v. Faskin, 754.

Huffman, 985.
MONEY RECEIVED.

V. OFFICERS, AG rs, AND EMPLOYÉS. 6(6) (Tex.Civ.App.) Plaintiff held entitled to recover payments made to regain possession

(A) Manicipal Officers in General, of railroad equipment.-Lancaster v. Faskin, ew124(1) (Ark.) Act providing that board of 754.

improvement district shall appoint collector Om 18(3) (Ark.) Evidence held to sustain therefor not repealed by later act.-Ætna Casfinding that plaintiff had not purchased bonus ualty & Surety Co. v. City of North Little and War Savings Stamps as alleged.-Weaver Rock, 294, v. First Nat. Bank, 556.

ww173(1) (Ark.) On collector's defalcations Om 18(3) (Tex. Civ. App.) Evidence held to fund from different accounts jointly divided pro show privity of contract to deliver railroad rata.--Ætna Casualty & Surety Co. v. City of equipment.--Lancaster V. Faskin, 754.

North Little Rock, 294. cmi 9(2) (Tex.Civ.App.) Charge held suffi- Curs 173(3) (Ark.) City collector held not to be ciently to submit case under pleadings and evi- "collector for improvement districts" as regards dence.-Lancaster v. Faskin, 754.

liability on official bond.-Ætna Casualty &

Surety Co. v. City of North Little Rock, 294.'
MONOPOLIES.
II. TRUSTS AND OTHER COMBINATIONS

IX. PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS.
IN RESTRAINT OF TRADE.

(E) Assessments for Benefits, and Special w 17(1) (Tex,Civ.App.) Contract to sell products of manufacturer in restricted territory for Cw406(1) (Tex.civ.App.) City has only power stipulated portion of selling price held agency to assess as is expressly or impliedly granted contract, and not violative of Anti-Trust Act. in charter.-Texas Bitulithic Co. v. Dallas ConMcConnon & Co. v. Powell, 428.

sol. Electric St. Ry. Co., 746. 17(1) (Tex.civ.App.) Contract binding re- cm 412 (Tex.civ.App.) City has authority to tailer to sell wholesaler's goods exclusively at declare what kinds of work constitute part of prices fixed by him held void.—Dickerson v. Mc. local improvement for which local assessment Connon & Co., 1084.

Contract Co 17(2) (Tex.Civ.App.)

can be made.-Texas 'Bitulithic Co. v. Dallas between

Consol. Electric St. Ry. Co., 746. manufacturer and buyer of goods held monopo- Cum 417(1) (Tex.Civ. App.) Charter authorizing listic.-W. T. Rawleigh_Co. v. Marshall, 153.

street improvements, impliedly authorizes conOn 21 (Tex.Civ.App.) Evidence held sufficient to support findings of restrictions of business struction of storm sewers and drains and as

therefor.–Texas Bitulithic Co. v. of buyer by manufacturer of goods.-W. T. Dallas Consol. Electric St. Ry. Co., 746. Rawleigh Co. v. Marshall, 153.

Charter provision for general assessment for Cw21 (Tex.Civ.App.) Existence of monopo- sewers does not prohibit local assessment for listic contract held for jury.-Dickerson y. Mc

sewers part of street improvement.-Id. Connon & Co., 1084.

Cam425(3) (Tex.Civ.App.) Street railway lia

ble to assessment for proportion_of cost of MORTGAGES.

storm sewer lying under track.-Texas BituSee Chattel Mortgages.

lithic Co. v. Dallas Consol. Electric St. Ry.

Co., 746. III. CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION.

460 (Tex.Civ.App.) Cost of storm sewers (D) Lien and Priority.

and drains part of street paving, and properly

included in local assessment.-Texag Bitulithic On 178 (Ky.) Tax provision held to give lien Co. v. Dallas Consol. Electric St. Ry. Co., 746. for taxes paid regardless of statute.-Morganfield Nat. Bank v. Union County Bank & Trust Co., 846.

(F) Enforcement of Assessments and Spe

cial Taxes. VI. TRANSFER OF PROPERTY MORT C551 (Ky.) Setting out proceedings in peGAGED OR OF EQUITY OF

tition to enforce lien for improvements is unREDEMPTION.

necessary.-Bailey Const. Co. v. Cornett, 235. em 280(3) (Tex.Civ.App.) Verbal promise to Failure of resolution and ordinances filed pay and assume mortgage is valid. --Holland v. with petition as exbibits to show adoption and W. C. Belcher Land Mortg. Co., 803.

publication does not invalidate petition.—Id. Agreement of assumption may be incorporat-C552 (Ky.) After work is accepted, property ed in deed or be outside conveyance.-Id.

must show defense to lien.-Bailey Em 292(5) (Tex.Civ.App.) In action on note Const. Co. v. Cornett, 235. secured by mortgage, neither prior grantor nor subsequent grantee necessary parties.-Hol

USE AND REGULATION land v. W. C. Belcher Land Mortg. Co., 803.

PLACES, PROPERTY, AND WORKS. 292(6) (Tex.Civ.App.) Petition sufficiently alleged defendant's promise to pay note.-Hol

(A) Streets and Other Public Ways. land v. W. C. Belcher Land Mortg. Co., 803. 683(2) (Ky.) Constitution does not require

advertisement for bids before contracting with MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS. reference to franchise. - Johnson County Gas

Co. v. Stafford, 515. See Counties; Schools and School Districts;

Increase of rates perniitted by franchise is Street Railroads.

not "grant of franchise" within Constitution.

-Id. 1. CREATION. ALTERATION, EXISTENCE, 706(6) (Ky.) Evidence held to take issue AND DISSOLUTION.

of defendant's negligence in operating automo(A) Incorporation and Incidents of Er- bile to jury.-Robson v. Zumstein Taxicab Co., istence.

S72. Cum 12(3) (Mo.App.) Petition for incorporation (707 (Tex.Cr.App.) Evidence held insuffiof town as city of fourth class, not separately rient to support conviction for failure to render

owner

XI.

OF PUBLIC

or

For cases in Dec.Dig. & Am.Dig. Key-No.Series & Indexes see same topic and KEY-NUMBER
XII. TORTS.

should not deprive injured party of remedy.(C) Defects Obstructions in Streets Henderson v. St. Louis & S. F. Ry. Co., 957. and Other Public Ways.

C10 (Tex.Com.App.) Consequences which C762(1) (Tex.Com.App.) Liability of city

are to be anticipated.--City of Dallus v. Maxfor injuries in highways does not extend to con

well, 667. sequences of extraordinary occurrences.-City

II. PROXIMATE CAUSE OF INJURY. of Dallas v. Maxwell, 667. Oma 763(1) (Tex.Com.App.) Ordinary care re- no 56(1) (Ky.) “Proximate cause" and "re. quired in construction and maintenance of high- mote cause" defined.--Dunn v. Central State ways.-City of Dallas v. Maxwell, 667.

Hospital, 216. 764 (1) (Tex.Com.App.) Liability of city 59 (Tex.Com.App.) What is actionable may extend to injury from conditions not lo- negligence.-City of Dallas v. Maxwell, 667. cated in street itself.-City of Dallas v. Max

III. CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE. well, 667. ww796 (Tex.Com.App.) City pot negligent as (A) Persons Injured in General. to passenger in jitney for failure to erect bar-66(1) (M0.App.) Knowledge of danger obrier.-City of Dallas y. Maxwell, 667.

tainable from exercise of ordinary care is imC-800 (1) (Tex.Com. App.) Injury from loss putable to person. Henderson v. St. Louis & of control of automobile within domain of un- S. F. Ry. Co., 987. usual and extraordinary.-City of Dallas v. Maxwell, 667.

(C) Imputed Negligence. Ca 800 (5) (Tex. Com. App.) Negligence of

www93(2) (Ark.) Wife's negligence in driving driver of jitney no defense to action by pas- | husband's automobile imputable to him.-Wis. senger for injury.-City of Dallas v. Maxwell, consin & Arkansas Lumber Co. v. Brady, 278. 667.

Cam95(1) (Ky.) Father's negligent failure to (D) Defects or Obstructions in Sewers,

procure competent physician not imputable to Drains, and Water Courses.

child.-H, T. Whitson Lumber ('0. v. Upchurch,

243. C843 (Ky.) City held not liable for damages from defective drain.-Huss v. City of Lud

(D) Comparative Negligence. low, 185.

Sam 101 (Mo.) Contributory negligence of emXIII, FISCAL MANAGEMENT, PUBLIC ployee in interstate commerce may only be conDEBT, SECURITIES, AND TAXA

sidered in mitigation of damages.-Laughlin v. TION.

Missouri Pac. R. Co., 949. (D) Taxes and Other Revenue, and Appli

IV. ACTIONS, cation Thereof. Cw966(5) (Tex.Com.App.) Mortgage bonds de

(B) Evidence. posited by insurance company with state treas-w122(1) (Mo.App.) Every reasonable inurer taxable in city.-City of Waco v. Amicable tendment to be drawn in favor of plaintiff in deLife Ins. Co., 332.

termining his contributory negligence as matCow 972(2) (Tex.Civ.App.) Assessment at less ter of law.--Henderson v. St. Louis & S. F. Ry. than actual market value is valid when uni- Co., 987. formly applied to all taxable property.-City of El Paso v. Howze, 99.

(C) Trial, Judgment, and Review. 972(3) (Tex.civ.App.) Valuation for taxa Caw 136 (25) (Ky.) Proximate cause ordinarily tion is quasi judicial act' requiring exercise of question for jury.--Dunn v. Central State Hosjudgment and discretion.-City of El Paso v. pital, 216. Howze, 99.

Om 136 (25) (Ky.) Evidence held not to show em 974(2) (Tex.civ. App.) Increase in valua- defendant's negligence was proximate cause of tion without notice is invalid.-City of El Paso plaintiff's injury from falling from ladder.v. Howze, 99.

Martin v. Louisville Gas & Electric Co., 868. Increase in valuations for taxation without cm 139(1) (Tex.civ.App.) Where negligence notice and hearing by city council as board of must be alleged and proved and evidence is conequalization held invalid.-Id.

flicting, court must define negligence and subMURDER.

mit question to jury.-St. Louis Southwestern

Ry. Co. of Texas v. Cox, 1101. See Homicide.

NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS. MUTUAL BENEFIT INSURANCE.

See Bills and Notes. See Insurance, aw 723-825.

NEW TRIAL. NAMES, en 6 (Mo.) Order of publication to enforce

See Criminal Law, Om913-957. lien held insufficient.--Newton v. Olson-Schmidt

II. GROUNDS. Const. Co., 929. w 10 (Ky.) Application of statute requiring (D) Disqualification or Misconduct of or

Affecting Jury. iling of single transactions.-Pratt v. York, 192.

C42(2) (Tex.Com.App.) Jurors in personal NEGLIGENCE.

injury case held to exhibit bias and prejudice,

depriving plaintiff of impartial trial by jury.-See Master and Servant, Ento137-332; Munici- Rhoades v. El Paso & S. W. Ry. Co.. 1064. pal Corporations, Ow762-842; Railroads,

(4413) (Tex.Civ.App.) Jury's discussion of C265-447; Street Railroads, Om99.

plaintiff's counsel fees held not to influence 1. ACTS OR OMISSIONS CONSTITUTING

verdict.-Davis v. Christmas, 126. NEGLIGENCE.

52 (Tex.Civ.App.) Jury's determining that

plaintiff could recover something before decid(A) Personal Conduct in General.

ing special issues not indicative that special isComo l (Tex.Civ.App.) “Negligence" defined.- sues were not fairly answered.-Davis Wichita Valley Ry, Co. v. Meyers, 444.

Christmas, 126. Games 2 (Tex.Com.App.) Relation of parties controlling factor.-City of Dallas v. Maxwell. 667. (G) Surprise, Accident. Inadvertence, or

Mistake. ww4 (Tex.Civ.App.) “Ordinary care" defined. -Wichita Valley Ry. Co. v. Meyers, 444,

90 (Tex.Civ.App.) Refusal of new trial on C 6 (Mo.App.) Want of knowledge of ordi- ground of surprise held not error.-Lancaster nance, requiring watchmen at railroad crossing, .v. Faskin, 754.

[ocr errors]

(H) Newly Discovered Evidence.

PARENT AND CHILD. 099 (Tex.Civ.App.) Refusal to grant new See Guardian and Ward; Infants. trial held not an abuse of discretion of trial 3(1) (Ky.) Father is not liable for necescourt.-Ferguson v. Jackson, 66.

Granting a new trial for newly discovered saries furnished to emancipated child.--Sim. evidence is within discretion of trial court.-Id. mons v. Stewart, 892. Paw 100 (Ky.) That witness testifying on the

Infant who works for wages or otherwise trial will now modify his testimony does not supports himself and pays bis expenses with make evidence newly discovered. - Cooper v. parent's consent is "emancipated."-Id. Williarason, 245.

m5(3) (Ky.) Father is not entitled to wages Cari 04(3) (Ky.) Alleged newly discovered of. emancipated child.-Simmons v. Stewart, evidence of matter gone into on the trial held 892. cumulative.-Cooper v. Williamson, 245.

C 16 (Ky.) Child held emancipated.-SimEmo 108(2) (ky.) Evidence of transmission of mons v. Stewart, 892. title from one whose own title was not proved Infant too young to take care of himself candoes not require new trial.-Cooper v. Wil not be emancipated.-Id. liamson, 245. When case went off on question of paper ti

PARTIES. tle, newly discovered evidence that successful For parties on appeal and review of rulings as party never had possession insufficient.-Id.

to parties, see Appeal and Error, Cam 108(2) (Tex.civ.App.) Newly discovered For parties to particular proceedings or instrutestimony held insufficient to authorize new ments, see also the various specific topics. trial.-Two States Telephone Co. v. Hurley, 424,

III. NEW PARTIES AND CHANGE OF

PARTIES. III. PROCEEDINGS TO PROCURE NEW

51(1). (Tex.Civ.App.) Statute providing TRIAL.

for suit in county of either defendant permis143(5) (Tex.Civ.App.) Verdict of jury sive only.-H. W. Williams & Co. v. Turnercannot be impeached by ex parte affidavit of Myers Drug Co., 825. juror.-Jacobsen v. Van Syckel, 124.

Om51 (4) (Ark.) Refusing to permit assignor Omw 167(1) (Ky.) Action for new trial is inde- of claim to be made party not error where pendent equity action, and tried as similar ac cause of action barred by limitation.-National tions.-Cooper v. Williamson, 245.

Fire Ins. Co. v. Pettit-Galloway Co., 262.

emo 51 (4) (Tex.civ.App.) Defendant's right NONSUIT.

under alleged creditors' agreement not that of

surety or contractee requiring appearance of See Dismissal and Nonsuit.

creditors in defendant's county.-H. W. Wil

liams & Co. v. Turner-Myers Drug Co., 825. NOTES,

Omw 53 (Tex.Com.App.) Incumbent upon defendSee Bills and Notes.

ant to plead facts showing third party a part

ner who should be brought into suit.-Fowler NOVATION.

Commission Co. v. Charles Land & Co., 314, om 5 (Tex.Civ.App.) Third party's assumption

V. DEFECTS, OBJECTIONS, AND of debt by mutual assent of parties constitutes

AMENDMENT. novation.-Continental Gin Co. v. Gardner, 92. 097(2) (Tex.Civ.App.) Joinder of mere

Creditor's agreement to accept third party nominal partner not necessary party to suit as payor, and to discharge original debtor, suf- for brokerage.-South Dakota-Texas Oil Co. ficient to constitute novation.-Id.

v. Hackworth, 813. w12 (Tex.civ.App.) Defendant's testimony held sufficient to establish novation.-Conti

PARTITION. Dental Gin Co. v. Gardner, 92.

II. ACTIONS FOR PARTITION.

(A) Right of Action and Defenses. NUISANCE.

Cmw 12(5) (Ky.) Remaindermen cannot have II. PUBLIC NUISANCES.

compulsory partition during life tenancy of en(C) Abatement and Injunction. tire property.-Duke v. Allen, 894. mw77 (Mo.) Equity courts

have power

to om 14 (Tex.Civ.App.) Any cotenant may deabate public nuisances although they may en

mand partition.-Caldwell v. Farrier, 425. tail violation of criminal law.-State ex rel. Cu 22 (Ky.) Interest in dower tract held reBurns v. Shain, 591.

leased by deed to interest in estate except part
conveyed by other heirs to grantor.-Gray v.

Gray, 172.
OBLIGATION OF CONTRACTS.
See Constitutional Law, Em143-166.

(B) Proceedings and Relief.

Omw 43 (Tex.Civ.App.) “Cotenancy" used with. OFFICERS.

out regard to distinction between different forms

of tenancy in statute as to venue of partition See District and Prosecuting Attorneys; Judg. suits.-Caldwell v. Farrier, 425. es; Sheriffs and Constables.

Venue lies in any county in which any defend

ant resides.-Id. III. RIGHTS, POWERS, DUTIES, AND Cm77 (4) (Ky.) 183-acre farm held indivisible LIABILITIES.

under evidence.-Gray v. Gray, 172. 94 (Ky.) Additional duties may be imposed without additional compensation.-Board of

PARTNERSHIP. Drainage Com’rs of McCracken County v. Al

IV. RIGHTS AND LIABILITIES AS TO liston, 850.

THIRD PERSONS.
PARDON.

(A) Representation of Firm by Partner. Pw4 (Ky.) Lawmaking body can confer on w 139 (Tex.Com.App.) Contracts joint and mayor power to pardon violators of ordinances. / several.-Fowler Commission Co. v. Charles -Noore v. City of Newport, 837.

Land & Co., 314. Power is not inherent in any department or officer.--Id.

(B) Nature and Extent of Firm Liabilities. Mayor cannot pardon violator of state law Coma 165 (Tex.Civ.App.) Creditor held not es.

« AnteriorContinuar »