Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1879-03-06

The following are abstracts OF supreme
court opinions delivered Saturday, March 1st:
Receirey'-PrOpsyty Conveyed IN Trust
SaperSedeaS.-It is within the competency of
the chancery court to appoint receiver of
property conveyed in trust for creditors, upon
bill filed 10y the trustee and bene6claries to
impouud the trust property in advance of the
time fixed in the deed for the trustee to take
possession and sell, and this court has no
power to supervise its action upon an appl-
cation for a supersedeas under the Code, Sec
ton 1888, nor will the alleged incapacity Of
the grantor TO contract change the result,
that beng a fact which could not be deter
mined on such a mOtion.-l Hamilton VS.,
Wynne
Statute Of LiD,itation-D Delivery Bond.-An
action upon a forfeited delivery bond is an
action upon q contract and not upon judg-
ment, and the limitation Is six years.
Haynes VS.. Jordan.
Joint purchasers of land-Partners-
AtachHleHt.-Joi purchasers of land, where
one party pays more than his share, stand In
respect to the equities between them as part
ners, and the party paying the excess has
the right to be reimbursed out of the land;
and also to have debts paid for money Jointly
borrowed to pay on the land before the other
party or his attaching creditor can have any
part of the proceeds. Cases cited: Gee VS.
Gee, 2 Sneed, 395; Rankin vs.. Mack, l
Head; Williams vs. Love, 2 Head; Furman
& Co., VS. nj Williams.
Damages to land by railrOadS-.Stat,ete Of
FBita.ioHS.-A petition 10y the owner for the
appointment Of commissioners to assess his
damages fer land taken by railroad COM
pany, filed under charter, which, after the
lapse Of five years, raises the presumption of
a good grant OF land by the owner to the
company, aud gives the latter a "good right
and title tor the purpose of the charter, Will
be dismissed on demurrer, if it be shown on
1t TO ~ Inn Of
since the completion of the road through the
land, without MORE Barnes VS. l.. d n.
r. r.
l. VII Partial HteStacy.-A testator
devised all his estate, real and personal, to
his wife during widowhood, to hold the same
to help her school and raise his children,
with power 10 give them their portion or
so much as might be agreed upon by her and
the executors, and with power in the execu-
tors TO sell or trade any OF the property that |
they might think for the comfort and interest |
of the wife and children, but said nothing |
more IN his will in relation to the portion" |
of the children. Held: That there was a |
partial intestacy; and that the property, |
subject to the estate OF the widow, vested at |
the testator's death in his children, each |
child taking an equal share in remainder, to |
be enjoyed on the termination of the widows |
estate, or sooner, by the exercise OF the power |
OF making advancements.
2. WHL-COHtiHgeHt Remaider.-A tesla
tor devised certain land to his wife for life,
and ''at the death" OF his wife to his only
surviving child, for the joint and several
lives Of herself and husband, with remain
der over" to his grandchildren then in being,
and to the heirs and representatives of those
grandchildren who may have died. Held:
that the estate IN remainder vested at the |
death OF the testator's widow
). Statute Of descent-COde, section 2204
CoHstyHed.-The Code, section 242O. under
takes to provide in what manner the land of
an intestate owner shall be inherited by his
lineal descendants, collateral kindred and
aFcendants' and makes subdivisions which
a common plan, and has used, in its second
subdivision, the word acquired, =" as includ-
ing all lands which came to an intestate in
any other way than SHY gift, devise or