The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1875-08-16

TH AHt&r7cGN hrNyS. @SSon. sHs5F5s Y
Deciaons on GendfM Inthest Ieadeo 10
q The Coisris OF LIE Resort the se7efnf
Fl s.a:es.witi Noiss and Reietenees gf
ISAAC Grant GHosPs1N. Volut9e Aes.
AIbahys JoHsD 2kssass, Js-, assa-
This series Of reports has become familiar
to The legal profession. It has won its way
to general iaccepance and use byits mer'ts.
We have SC. often called attention to IL. l.s
design and its peculiar characteristics tnae we
deem It unnecessary 10 do so at length 10
noticing the volume which has just made fts
appearance. But we must not om't 10 say
that this volume contains some important
Virginia csses reported fn 2ad Grattan-to-
wit: Creme Us. Adon1s; Ontd d CdTTtns.o"
us. C,iy Of ,Rtchmond Rollo U.s. andes IN,
surance. Company; Preston us. H""; auu
Soeerus. The Commonwealth.
T.n't tt,me that Mr.. PARSONS had amended
.hos tile Of his series? '"Dectsions decided"
is not elegant by any means, il indeed 1t IS
English, - "7il = ~
The following are a few of the syllaouaes
tsi.H - - u ALIMoSY. - 7
1ay be granted 'ohers dLt.Ics 20 or en,. fr ali,
nonr alone and will grant The same IN proper
cas-, though no divorce or o6her reiet Is sought
Grl,res vs. GRAVES (iowa), 90. t.r,....- .,5
:-i.rsa9.a ..>'.t BANKING. -- IL
|.e-,;ssd Standardization after ocerti ecnttofa-
,oben link not estopped bg pdy1nent;l s1ans
,,irh ra,s check which IL has cerllneo Dut WHICH
teI ey rasese from re RECOVERING bses The
m"mcy paid 1t l. bound only as to The Signature OF
III drawer aud Its own no,,I
ina dssocl0.,on fNew YorKJ. 1892, and note, 237.
:-.s,F 81: Tn IBASKRUPTCf.E5a1- s'"t ~
]. Mortgage Of persoaai' property, hop objected
bull a mortgage on personal proef.y to NJ,
Spe lnortgagor fled hts psti,ion In banFrnplcy.
Wben The mortgage became Que the mprteagees
took possession Of The prop.riy. IN aa ssuSn Si
hid ri that the assignee took only the equity OF
red.inpiion, Dy virtue OF the bankruptcy proeeea,
ssios OF the property: (2. that the mortgage
could hold The proDt rly although ne knew, at Tue
cate OF he mortgage t ,bs r9S ihar he h
reasonable cause 10 believe that the 1nordxagor lil-
Tended 10 dttraud ,h= bankrupt act.-Be''tley W.
% &c Essct ofpropi7,g debit The holder OF note,
tue makers ui which nave become bankrupt Is NOT
estOareh by proving Inc no;e as an renS
from an accom- odd iud0rser who holes mort
age from The makers IS security va
ttonaL Bunk VS.. CoIRstOcH Sew ofkl, 100 ~
l. Performance of condition rendered lmposSl;
bic and {; ciiarteIe ed w ssel, ana gave oou
win as surety, conditioned for her Return az a
cert ain time In good .Orutr. me fcsaei was ue-
strtyed IN u gale By tie "act OF Con" Hefd lDat
inc ,blfzors were not released from llaonty On the
b0ud-SteeIe vs. Buck ilI6Olsl, ~.
Q Filing in bunk liubiiIy Ql obugo1'l a
bnnd was siglcd bv r and Ii, ara ieft In Il hands
to raise money Oh. the understanding was that
The mou., should be obIaihed OF Y, but Is was not
crbdren TO get 1t OF any ore else, and blank was
left for the obIigee. got tue money or ID, and
Inserted his name In the blank. Held. thai A was
not liable TO y on the bond.-PreSton VS.. Hull Wiz
gtni.j, 1873. See l. EEs, 439.
r.. CARRIER. FL.
Erp7ess Co1npuny-limitutf0n Of tnbitity.]
GoDds to the vaiue of over $500 we're shipped by
express. the bill OF ladirg given b! the company
-tIpulating that II should not be liable In case OF
lss beyond $50. Tie goods were lost: and. IN au
action TO recover tbe reiOr the company claimed
that 1t was liable only 10 The extent of $50. Held,
that the measure IF liabh-y the value Of the
gotds such a limitation ia a bill OF ladipe does
not excuse the carrier from the exercise of oEti.
:ary cire, even when asscut.d 10 uy he shlpner;
and here thu goods FIJI to arrive Ut their d"sna-
t.o8 anu the carrier does not show tue manner OF
their loss The presumption arise, of want OF ord-
nary care -AQ1ms Express Company vs.. Stetta'
ners Illlinoisl, 81, AMI note, 60. go.
For sale by j. W. RANDOLPH s. ESdL1sH,
agents for the publishers. .a