The weekly pioneer and Democrat. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn. Territory) 1855-1865, 1864-05-13
THE WEEKLY PIONEER AND DEMOCRAT

THE WEEKLY PION]
Recent Decision Of Cases In the
Supreme Court.
Thomas D. Williams, appellant, against William
FL. Anderson, respondent.
SYLLABUS.
A Judgment non 0bst0nte rere dicto is q judy
ment entered by order of the court, for the
plaintiff in an action at law, Notwithstanding
q verdict in favor of the defendant. 1t is
always upon the merits, and never granted
but In a very clear case, as when it appears
from the plea that the defcndent can have no
merits
The complaint alleged that the defendant
employed the plaintiff to work for him year
at salary of $3.50; that at the expiration
OF some two months, defendant discharged
offered and had always been ready to perform
on his part but that defendant refused to
perform, &C., claiming the stipulated price, as
damages. The answer denied the offer and
readiness to perform and also that the plaintiff
had sustained any damage, alledging that i'm
mediately on his discharge he had engaged to
labor for other persons at large monthly wages.
Held, That each of these denials raised a ma
teriai issue, which would constitute a good
defence if sustained by proof
In o suit to recover q stipulated compensa-
ton, the defendant may show, in diminution
of damages, that after the plaintiff had been
dismissed, he had been engaged in other bust
ness.
Rachel Catlin, Plaintiff in Error, against Loren
Fletcher, Defendant in Error.
SYLLABUS.
Fraud cannot be predicated of promise not
performed for the purpose of avoiding writ
ten instrument or bargain of any kind. A
false promise not to enforce mortgage does
not faint the proceeding with such fraud as a
Court of Equity will relieve against.
Nor will Misrepresentation in regard to the
legal effect of the conveyance, avoid the in-
strument.
Samuel Landes, Executor, &C.. Respondent,
against Frederick A. OldS, ct al, appellants.
SYLLABUS.
In case of the death of d plaintiff in suit
pending, under section 81 comp. stat, page
$50, the successor in interest of the subject of
the litigation, may be admitted as plaintiff on
motion, when the title to the subject matter of
the litigation, as well as the person entitled,
may be disputed.
Where party in his notice of motion served
on the adverse party, asks for specific relief,
and for such other and further relief as may be
with the facts of the case presented. This rule,
however, should not be SO applied as to Ope-
rate as q surprise upon the opposite party, or
to deprive him of the privilege of being heard
in argument and by proof as to the further re-
lief to be granted.
Joel Rose: Respondent, against William H.
Roberts, Appellant.
SYLLABUS.
In the construction of contract the rule is
that every contract is to be construed with ref
erence to its object and the whole of its terms;
and accordingly the whole context must be
considered in endeavOring to collect the inten-
ton of the parties, even although the imme
date object of inquiry be the meaning of an
Wilhelmina Fagebank, Appellant, against Hen
ry Fagebank, Respondent
SYLLABUS.
Rule As, of the District Court Rules, IN so far
as it allows q defendant in q divorce suit, in
case of personal service of the summons and
complaint within the jurisdiction Ofthe Court,
more than thirty days to answer, is in conflict
with the statute, and the time prescribed by
the latter must govern.
William Ramsden. Appellant, against William
Okeefe and Bridget O'Keeie, Respondents.
SYLLABUS.
Ill.
OKeefe fraudulently disposed of personal prop
erty belonging to Plaintiff that he has converted
the proceeds into lands, has placed the title to
the same in the name of his wife, and that the
husband is wholly insolvent. Held that sufficient
was shown to give a court of equity jurscic
ton. and to entitle the Plaintiff to the relief
demanded.
Henry Russell, Respondent, against G.. 81.
Schurmer. Appellant.
SYLLABUS.
In an action to recover back money paid on
aparOl contract for the purchase ofland, it cam
not be shown by parOl, that bond for an alb
solute conveyance of the same lands, between
the same parties, was intended as security only
for the performance of the parol contract,
there being no allegation that the same was
made and executed through fraud mistake or
surprise.
Where party does not object to improper
evidence at the time it is offered. he is not ne
cessarily precluded from asking that the same
be excluded, or withdrawn from the considera-
ton of the jury, at any time before the cause is
submitted to the jury. The matter must rest
in the sound discretion of the Court, and when
party asks a correct charge in regard to inn
proper evidence, he is entitled to the same,
where 1t does not appear that the opposite par
ty is prcjudiced, by The delay in making the
objection.
Sherwood Hough, Plaintiff in Error, against
The Board of County Commissioners of the
County of Ramsey, Defendant in Error.
SYLLABUS.
Under Chap 2, Sess. Laws. 1857, the Regis
ter of Deeds is authorized to procure the books,
and make the entries requested by the act at
the expense OF his proper county.
Peter Whitaker, Plaintiff in Error, against Ed
mund Rice and George s. Borker, Defend
ants in Error.
Apayment by one joint obligor of the inter-
est due on bond, before the statute of limita-
tons has run against the bonds, will take the
same out of the statute for six years from the
date of the last payment as against his CO.
Obligors, nOtwithstand g the party paving is
named in the body or the bond as principal,
and the other obligors rs sureties, and the pay
ments were made by him without the know
ledge or consent of the surc.ies This decision
is based upon sections six and twenty-four of
chapter sixty Of the Compiled Statutes con-
corning the time of commencing actions"
Henry Hines, Respondent, against Henry