See ESTATES OF DECEDENTS (8); INJUNCTION (1); LANDLORD
AND TENANT (1); MANDAMUS (2, 4); PARTNERSHIP (6); REAL
PROPERTY (2).
EQUITY JURISDICTION—See ACCOUNTING; CONSTITUTIONAL
LAW (3); EXECUTORS AND ADMINISTRATORS (9); QUIETING Title
(2).
No bond is required by 1 Comp. Laws, § 507, before issuing an
injunction to stay proceedings at law for the recovery of the
possession of lands, until after verdict. Skutt v. Ionia Cir-
cuit Judge, 43.
ESCAPING STEAM-See RAILROADS (1).
ESCROW-See DEEDS (4); QUIETING TITLE (1).
ESTATES OF DECEDENTS.
1. No action can be maintained against an estate for negligence
which arose subsequent to the death of the intestate. Ban-
nigan v. Woodbury, 206.
2. Allegations in a declaration that an administrator has charge
of and controls real property of his decedent, admitted on
demurrer, will be construed to allege a lawful possession. Id.
3. An administrator is bound to exercise reasonable care in main-
taining real property, of which he has control, in a suffici-
ently safe condition to prevent injury to travelers on the ad-
jacent streets. Id.
4. A description of defendant as administrator of an estate may
be treated as surplusage, and does not negative a personal
liability for negligence. Id.
5. An administrator is personally liable for negligence in failing
to maintain a building under his control in safe repair,
whereby a window fell upon and injured a traveler. Id.
6. The probate court is authorized by statute to determine all
questions of advancement made by a deceased to his heirs or
distributees. In re Simon's Estate, 256.
7. An heir may by contract agree not to claim a share in the
estate of his ancestor, and is thereby estopped from claiming
any share of the estate. Id.
8. No recovery can be allowed in equity to the estate of a de-
ceased person from an attorney who prosecuted an action in
behalf of the widow of deceased, in the name of the admin-
istrator, for negligence causing death, under an agreement
with her for a contingent fee, where the attorney had com-
promised the cause of action and paid to the widow her share
as agreed; it appearing that the widow alone was pecuniarily
affected by the death, and the administrator consented to the
arrangement. Hackett v. McIlwain, 265.
ESTATES OF DECEDENTS—Continued.
9. A recovery by an administrator in trover for personal property
which remained in the possession of testator's son for thir-
teen years, subsequent to his death, is barred by testimony
which shows that the other persons interested in the property
by virtue of the testator's will acquiesced in the possession
by the son and had entered into a compromise with him of
their rights under the will, and that the administrator was
appointed for the purpose of instituting an action on the pe-
tition of a daughter who had no interest in the estate. Diem
v. Drogmiller, 380.
10. One having no interest in the estate of a deceased has no
right to petition either for the probate of the will or the ap-
pointment of an administrator. Id.,
11. Where plaintiff's own evidence discloses that he has no right
to recover as administrator, it is not a collateral attack
upon the order appointing him to direct a verdict for the
defendant.
12. The fact that a division of the parent's property is not equal
between children regarded with equal affection is not a suffi-
cient ground to disturb the distribution. Beadle v. Ander-
son, 483.
See ACCOUNTING (1); DEEDS (2); EVIDENCE (3); EXECUTORS
AND ADMINISTRATORS; WILLS (2).
ESTOPPEL-See ESTATES OF DECEDENTS (7); EXECUTORS AND AD-
MINISTRATORS (3); INSANE PERSONS (3); INSURANCE (2); PRINCI-
PAL AND AGENT (1); PUBLIC OFFICERS (2); REAL PROPERTY (2).
EVIDENCE.
1. If any error was committed on the trial in admitting in evi-
dence pleadings from a prior action in which the declaration
claimed damages for permanent injuries, and in holding that
the same was conclusive upon the plaintiff, it was not preju-
dicial, in view of instructions permitting a recovery for such
injuries on the ground that the same constituted no part of
the former judgment, having been excluded therefrom by
the court. Beattie v. Detroit United Railway, 243.
2. No error was committed by the trial court in refusing to com-
pel the production of the articles of incorporation of a non-
resident plaintiff, when it did not appear who had control of
the books, and defendant was permitted to produce secondary
evidence of the facts, and the production of the books was
not shown to be necessary. People's Building & Loan Ass'n
Co. v. Rutz, 440.
3. Statements made by deceased to complainant, or by her to
deceased, or by him to others in her presence, are excluded
by 3 Comp. Laws, § 10212, as amended by Act No. 36, Pub.
Acts 1903. Beadle v. Anderson, 483.
4. Testimony of physicians, in reply to hypothetical questions,
based on the extreme claims of a party and not supported in
all respects by the preponderance of evidence, does not con-
trol the question of mental competency. Id.
5. Parol evidence to change the effect of an unambiguous resolu-
tion, passed by the stockholders of a limited partnership asso-
ciation, conferring authority to sell property and pay indebt-
edness of the company, is incompetent. Lipsett v. Hassard,
509.
See BILLS AND NOTES (2, 5, 7, 8); BROKERS; CARRIERS (6–9, 14,
16); CONTRACTS (4); DAMAGES (4); DEEDS (2); FALSE IM-
PRISONMENT (5); FRAUD (1, 8-21); INSANE PERSONS (3, 4, 6,
9); INSTRUCTIONS; INSURANCE (7, 9); INTOXICATING
LIQUORS (5, 8-10); MALICIOUS PROSECUTION (4); MANDAMUS
(8); MASTER AND SERVANT (12, 13); MORTGAGES (1); NEG-
LIGENCE (3); NEW TRIAL (1); PARTNERSHIP (3-5); PAY-
MENT (1); PRINCIPAL AND AGENT (2); RAILROADS (1); SALES
(10); TRIAL (3, 4, 8, 12); WILLS (4-7, 9, 10).
EXCAVATIONS-See MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS (5).
EXCEPTIONS-See APPEAL AND ERROR (10, 15); SAVING QUES-
TIONS FOR REVIEW.
EXCEPTIONS BEFORE JUDGMENT-See CRIMINAL LAW.
On a motion to amend a bill of exceptions accompanied by a
showing that the circuit judge required an exhibit to be
attached which had been omitted by counsel, the amend-
ment may be granted. Suchocki v. Calumet Insurance Co.,
62.
See APPEAL AND ERROR (13-15).
EXCESSIVE COMPENSATION-See WORK AND LABOR.
EXCESSIVE RATE OF SPEED-See STREET RAILWAYS.
EXCESSIVE VERDICT-See DAMAGES (5,7); WORK AND LABOR.
EXECUTION-See BILLS AND NOTES (10); DEEDS (1).
EXECUTORS AND ADMINISTRATORS.
1. A trial by jury of the administrator's right to extra compen-
sation is not contemplated by 3 Comp. Laws, § 9438. In re
Fischer's Estate, 1.
2. Except in a case of abuse of discretion, the amount of an al-
lowance for extraordinary services, not required of an execu-
tor or administrator in the common course of his duty, is for
the trial court. Id.
3. Failure of an executor, for two years, to account, coupled with
his change of residence to another State, and withdrawal of
funds of the estate from the jurisdiction, warrant his removal,
which is not precluded by any estoppel arising from the fact
that the party asking such removal knew he intended to leave
the State, when she petitioned for his appointment. In re
Rice's Estate, 53.
EXECUTORS AND ADMINISTRATORS—Continued.
4. An attorney for one of the persons interested in an estate as
its sole creditor may properly be appointed executor. Id.
5. Evidence that the administrator neglected to collect rent and
failed to deposit funds of the estate where they might draw
three per cent. interest, but mingled them with his own, sus-
tains a finding by which the rents and interest on semi an-
nual balances are charged to him. In re Saier's Estate, 170.
6. A petition in probate court to order a rehearing of an adminis-
trator's final account is properly allowed on a showing of mis-
take or fraud. Act No. 271, Pub. Acts 1905. In re Mills'
Estate, 504.
7. An appeal from probate court on the sole ground of want of
jurisdiction does not permit a consideration of the merits in
the circuit. Id.
8. Where decedent and his wife were killed, nearly simultane-
ously, in a railway accident, and, under the terms of the will,
the wife would have received the residuary legacy unless she
died first, the administrator with the will annexed should
proceed to collect the assets and obtain an adjudication of
the right to the property, and cannot be enjoined from em-
ploying counsel at the expense of the estate to contest the
complainant's claim as an heir of deceased. Clifton v.
Keeler, 615.
9. Equity may in a proper case restrain an administrator from
unlawfully dissipating an estate. Id.
See ACCOUNTING; DEEDS (3); ESTATES OF DECEDENTS (2-5,
8-11); SAVING QUESTIONS FOR REVIEW (1).
EXHAUSTION OF REMEDIES-See INSURANCE (3, 11); PUBLIC
OFFICERS (3).
EXPENSES AND DISBURSEMENTS-See GUARDIAN AND WARD
(5).
EXPERIMENTS-See NEW TRIAL (1).
EXPERT EVIDENCE-See CARRIERS (16); EVIDENCE (4); INTOXx-
ICATING LIQUORS (10); TRIAL (12).
EXTRA COMPENSATION-See EXECUTORS AND ADMINISTRATORS
(1, 2).
EXTRADITION-See ACTION (1).
EXTRAORDINARY SERVICES-See EXECUTORS AND ADMINIS-
TRATORS (2).
1. An institution of a general charitable character, which by
statute is designated as a place of detention to which girls
may be committed by certain courts, is not such a govern-
mental agency that it is relieved of liability for false impris-
onment of an infant not so committed. Gallon v. House of
Good Shepherd, 361.
FALSE IMPRISONMENT-Continued.
2. A corporation organized for charitable purposes, administer-
ing a charitable fund by providing a shelter for girls who may
be exposed to corrupting influences, is liable for the torts of
its servants in unlawfully detaining inmates, as for the
breach of a non-delegable duty. Id.
3. The corporation is not excused from liability to pay such an
inmate damages by the fact that a trust fund would thus be
diverted. Id.
4. The question of the validity of a release signed by plaintiff's
ward, who stated that she executed it in ignorance of the
contents because she was afraid, was for the jury. Id.
5. To show motive not of a charitable kind, testimony is admis-
sible in such action tending to prove that the labor of the in-
mate was profitable to the defendant, that advertisements
were inserted in the papers to ascertain her whereabouts, and
other efforts made by her relatives to find her. Id.
See ARREST; DAMAGES (5).
FALSE STATEMENTS-See FRAUD (7).
FELLOW-SERVANTS-See MASTER AND SERVANT (14).
FIDUCIARY RELATIONS-See CORPORATIONS (6, 9, 10).
FINAL ACCOUNT-See EXECUTORS AND ADMINISTRATORS (6);
GUARDIAN AND WARD (4-9).
FINDINGS OF COURT-See SAVING QUESTIONS FOR REVIEW (2).
FIRE INSURANCE-See INSURANCE (4-6).
FIXTURES-See LANDLORD AND TENANT (2).
FORCIBLE ENTRY AND DETAINER.
Summary proceedings before the circuit court commissioner
will not lie to dispossess the original owner peaceably in pos-
session of tax homestead lands, purchased under Act No. 206,
Pub. Acts 1893, as amended by Act No. 141, Pub. Acts 1901;
the remedy being ejectment. Duff v. Hall, 513.
FOREIGN CORPORATIONS-See ATTACHMENT (1, 3); COPORA-
TIONS (3, 4, 12); EVIDENCE (2).
FORFEITURE-See DAMAGES (3); INSURANCE (1).
1. Under a bill of complaint charging defendant with obtaining
money for a corporation of which he was manager by fraud-
ulent representations, evidence that the representations were
made subsequent to the time of securing the loan, fails to
sustain the charge of fraud. Monroe v. Bushnell, 115; Id. 127.
2. The requirement of 3 Comp. Laws. § 9518, that representations
as to a party's credit or standing must be in writing or no
action may be brought on them, does not apply to conspira-
|