The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1883-03-12
THE COURT RECORD.
Supreme Court-NIarch 9.



FoRGERY-PLEADING-PR
1926. John Powers VS.. the State. Allen
Howk, J.-Prosecution for forgery in issuing
the following order: "Fort Wayne, Jan. %,
1888. Pay to John Beel $40. Henry Stillhorn"
Although not strictly speaking an order for the
payment of money, because no drawee is named,
it might be shown to be such by averment and
proof Bishop Stat. Crimes sectious 327, 1856;
% Ind, 359.) When there is good and bad
count i'll the Indictment and general verdict of
guilty, valid judgment can be entered on the
verdict and will be presumed TO have been en-
tered on the good count. q Whort. Grim. Law,
section 3,17S; SO Ind, 567D Judgment affirmed.
SCHOOL PROPERTY IN INCORPORATED TOWNS.
s,295. School Town of Leeshurg VS.. Plain
School Township. Kosciusko G. G.
Niblack, by the act of June H. 1852, each
civil township was made a school corporation ,and
all the duties Ach the trustees of school districts
had heretofore been required to perform were
devolved upOd the township trustees. Each
city and incorporated town was also made a
school corporation independently OF the town
ship in which IL might be situated, and We're
placed in charge of the school properly within
their limits, and they became the successors of
the school districts. When the town of Lees
burg was Incorporated it became the successor
of the appellee in all educational matters within
the limits of such town and as much distinct
school corporation as was the appellee over the
territory of the township remaining outside the
town. Appellant therefore became entitled to
the charge of the sehool-hnuse within it's borders
though built by the appellee long before. (o6
Ind, 52l.) The long-cOntinued possession of the
echOOl-nOuSe ny tue anDellee ana the eXpendl-
ture of large sums of money upon it
for school purposes conferred no new or add-
tional title to it upon the appellee They were
for the benefit of the class of persons now repre-
scented by the appellant and were in wise in
consistent with the claim of the appellant TO
possession. The court erred in overriding the
demurrer to appellee's complaint for possession.
Judgment reversed.
MINOR MARRIED WoMAN-DIsAPPEARANCE OF
1885 Rosanna Sims VS.. Peter Bardoner
Hamilton c. c.
Morris, C.-Appellaut's complaint AYERS that
in 1914, being minor she was induced by her
husband TO join in the conveyance of certain real
restate owned by her prior to her marriage: that
her husband received the purchase money of the
land and refused to permit her TO disaffirm her
deed until shortly before the bringing Of this
suit. Prayer that to her the deed be
declared void and her title quoted. A
demurrer sustained the complaint
In such case the Disturbance must be made
within reasonable time after the infant attains
his majority and the question is whether in such
"A case as TINS thlrty-three years after attaining
majority is Il reasonable time. What is a rea-
sOnable time depends upon the particular cir
exercised before the statue of limitations be-
come a bar to an action to recover the land CON
Veyed Il OF K. s., 300. The deed of an infant
feme covert may be avoided within reasonable
time after she has become discovert she having
done nothing to a firm the conveyance (24 Ind,
385; Bkf., 442; Ind, 403; So Ind, g.
Sehoule DOM Act, 5S4; 80 Ind, 100 AS APP
her husband refused to permit her to give no.
tce of her desire to disaffirm, rs she
has done pothng in affirDance of the
deed, and as the grant ee knew when the deed was