The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1883-03-29


Hon. William A. Woods. Chief Justice.
DITcHEs-DIvIsIoN OF cosT-APPRAIsEEs RE-
PORT.
1911. George Bogart VS. John Castor, Ham
ilton, c. c.
Eiotr, J.-Under the ditch law the appraisers
must embOdy the statement of the division OF
the cost OF the ditch in their sworn report. The
evident purpose of the Legislature was to secure
report which would enable land owners to
know the total cost of the ditch, the manner in
which it affected their respective lands; and the
damages or benefits to each respectively. Such
statutes are to receive a strict construction as
against the land owner. judgement affirmed.
5000 anu 1851, Abner II. Bowen VS.. samuel
BraEmier. Carroll c. G.
NiblHcR, J.-The controlling questinns involved
in these cases were decided in the case of Bowen
VS., Bragmier, No. 5000 (Niarch 27), and upon
the authority OF that case the Judgment Is re-
versed.
sHERIFFS-IYDEMNITY BOND.
1929 Franklin Alwine VS.. Henry Sprinkle.
Huntington C. C.
Woods, c. J.-Where a sheriff levies on proper
tY and suits are brought TO recover the properly
from him, his duty to the execution plaintiff
only requires that he give notice of the suits and
permit defense TO he made i'll his name. And in
such case it is competent for the parties to
agree that the sheriff shall himself "duly defend
the causes" ana that the owner OF the writ or
MS representative Will pay whatever costs ana
damages may he adjudged against the officer.
q BIKE, 343) While the officer is bound 10 per
form his duty according TO law without indem-
my, II an Indemnity is given he may be re-
CURED to do many things that he would be lusti-
ned in not doing without an indemnity. e Johns.
1877; 10 i'd, 147; Al n. Y, 464 80 i'd, 373D 1t
follows that such bond may be enforced. Judg-
ment reversed.
1929. John Darrell VS.. The Hilligass, etc,
Gravel Road Company Rush G. c.
Elliott, J.-Thls cause has heen pending in
this court since Noevmber, 1881, was submitted
on default of appellant in May, 1882, and no
snch brief as the rules require has been hled.
tBusk., Prac., 323) Appeal dismissed.
ISLANDER BY wIFE--MABILITY OF HUSBAND.
n
Monroe e. c.
HowK, J.-Under the law as it stood prior to
The acts of 1881, where husband and wife were
jointly sued tor Islander committed by the wife,
the husband was not entitled to the benefits of
the exemption law against such Judgment.
Inc Judgment against HIM for damages IN the
sanuer suit concludes the question Of the ex-
emption or his property from sale unter such
Judgment, and is "A complete bar to his subse-
quent claim for such exemption. Us Ind., 40; %
H., 1913; AZ ID, 2Sl) section 5,l20, X, 3. 1881,
provides that "marrid women, without reference
10 their ages, shall be Liable for tOrts committed
by them; and an action may be prosecuted
against them for torts committed as if unmar-
red. Husbands snail not be liable for the con-
tracts Of the torts of their wives" Judgment
affirmed.
JUSTICES coURTs-oHANGE OF vENUE-cosTs.
10,32I. L., N. A. & {. Ryr Co. VS.. John Hogen.
Jasper c. G..
collars, appeal from a Judgment in favor
OF the appellee for stock killed by appellants
ears.
The evidence is amply sufficient to sustain
the verdict. In civil cases the justice granting
change of venue has no right to fix the day OF
trial before the justice to whom the case is sent,
nor is the latter required to give notice to either
party of the day fixed for trial OF this the par
lies are bound to take notice, and where the JUS
tice issued % summons for such purpose the cost
uccasioned thereby must fall upon the party
who procured 1t TO be issued. Where there was
an appear ance and change of venue from t=e
justice before whom the case originated, but no
appearance at the trial before the justice to
whom the case was sent, this was not such an
appearance as tae statute requires to carry
costs in the Circuit Court, where the judgment
id, 343) Affirmed in part and reversed i'll
part