Weekly Indiana State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1853-1861, 1855-08-30
DECISIONS
SUPREMECOURT OF INDIANA,


MAY TERN, ls55.
Rgorief G. Porter, Esq, Reporter eftks cosrt-
The Indiana Central Railway Company q.
Atkison. Error Hancock C. C.
PERKINS, j. A railroad act provided for
AN appeal from the Judgment OF justice of
the peace, on an assessment Of damages for
land taken, &c, -'as in other cases" Held,
that by reducing the plaintiffs judgment Eve
dollars or more on the appeal, the appellant
would recover costs Reversed, as to costs,
but affirmed as to residue.
D. S. GOOding T. A. Hendricks. and C. II.
Test, for the plaintiff; T. d. waIpOle. for tho
defendant
Unthauk .. The Henry County Turnpike
Company. Appeal Henry c. c.
STUART, J. Where the execution Of
written instrument, referred TO in the plead
ings, is called in question, it must, by the r.
S. 1852, be denied either by affidavit before
trial, or by pleadings under oath.
Sections as and 7s5 of the practice act do
not apply to pie ldings in denial Of the exc
cutiOn of written instruments.
The charter of railroad company required
that notice of the demand for the payment
Of instalments on subscriptions, should be
published in a newspaper, &c, at least three
weeks prior to the day the instalments be-
came due. In a suit to recover instalments,
a copy of the publication made in the news
paper, accompanied by the publishers oath
that it had been so published for three weeks.
was produced in evidence. On objection that
the three successive papers in which the notice
was published were not produced, held, that the
evidence was prinsa facie sufficient
$ In suit by railroad company, stock
i holder IS competent witness for the compa-
! ny. affirmed, with per cent damages.
f W. Grose, for the appellant; j. T. Elliott
: and J. II. Mellett for the appellee.
!, The Franklin Insurance Company .. Gull
5 yer. Appeal johnson c. G.
= DAWSON, J. The conditions Of an insu-
2 rance policy issued to the plaintiff, provided
Il that persons sustaining loss by FIRE, should
4 forthwith give notice thereof, in writing TO
- the company or their agent, and as soon after
as as possible, deliver particular an account
N of their loss as the nature of the case would
it admit of, (and if within their power, render
ID to the company a schedule Of the articles de-
stroycd or damaged, stating article by article,
s. signed with their proper hands, and that they
should accompany the same with their oath
y or affirmation, declaring the account to be
- just &C., and what was the cash value Of the
- subject insured Whenever demanded in
IL writing they were also required TO produces
nr an exhibit of their books Of account, and
vouchers in support Of their claim, and per
n NIT extracts and copies thereof to be made
n &c. The conditions further provided tha
no any fraud or false swearing by the insured
IL should cause a forfeiture of all claims, and
be bar to all remedies under the policy. In
ne a suit upon the policy for a loss of the sub
a. iect insured, the plaintiff exhibited the state
its ment furnished by him to the company under
oath, as follows: "0ne-story frame-house
=, - $780, Dry Goods, $1,000; Groceries, $50
I'd Queensware, S25; Hardware, $25; the whole
d. 8, 400" The statement further showed
nt that all the bills of goods purchased by him
" were consumed by the fire, and that he wa
n therefore unable make out invoice o
On the items and costs Of the articles destroyed
al that to the best of his knowledge and belief
~ said statement was true and just, AID the fai
= cash value Of the goods was between 400 snt
I'd $500. 1t also appeared in evidence tina
m the plaintiffs invoices were consumed viii
AT his goods, and that he had no copies, and
\ that the company's secretary had called on
ne him to sign an instrument requesting the per
sons from whom he had purchased the goods
he to furnish the amounts Of the invoices bu
I'd that he had refused to do SO.
The plaintiff obtained verdict and judg
10 ment for $500 less than the amount Of BIZ
l.. loss as alleged in his statement to the com
/. pany.
e. Held, that the plaintiff was not required b,
Sc the conditions of the policy TO sign the in
p strument presented by the company's score
Of tary. Held, also, that the excess Of the plain
" tiff's claim, as furnished to the company, owe
as the verdict, did not show him to have beer
g guilty Of "false swearing" Held, also, tina
40 by "false swearing" was meant the swearin,
~ to false statement knowingly.
of An instruction will be presumed to hay.
e been pertinent to the evidence, where tn,
n contrary does not appear. A6irmei, with
Dy per cent damages.
as +. M. Finch and S. Major, for the appel
liant; G. NJ Overstreet A b. Hunter,
- Barbour and A. G. Porter, for the appellee
iy