The Indianapolis journal., 1884-01-14
TIE RECORD OF THE COURTS
Supreme Court-Jan. IL.
Hon. Geo. " Howk. Chief Justice.
INTERRoGAToRIEsA AafoTIoN FOR NEW TRIAL

collars. 1.-The mere statement that the jury,
with their general verdict, returned their answers
tonterrOgatOries propounded by the defendant, is
| not sufficient to show that the interrOgatories
! were submitted to the jury by the court (S2
Ind, 963; 20 id 47S. Where bill of exceptions
| Is on file when the motion for new trial is
! made, reference may be made in the motion to
! evidence wrongfully excluded contained in such
! bill Expert witnesses must base their opinions
| on their own testimony, OR on facts assumed to
have been proved and can not give their opinions
ON their own recollection and construction of the
testimony in the (36 Ind 60; 81 i'd. 43)
| Where evidence objected to the part of all the
defendants Jointly is competent as to one or
more, the objection must be overruled. 70 Ind,
| 52o; ii i'd, 369) Judgment affirmed
| GROWING CoRN-DEsCRIPTIoN-co OF
SALE.
10390 VIM B. Thomas VS.. Samuel B. Mathis.
| Warren c. c.
Franklin, Con petition for rehearing. The
contract sued on was for the sale of 'all the
on 200 acres of my farm now growing" This de
scI1ption was sufficient to identify the corn, and
| this was all that was required When appellant
refused to keep the terms of the contract ap-
pellee had the right TO for its breach without
keeping up the tender. The complaint shows
sufficient excuse for not demanding the corn, the
| absence Of defendant from home and his refusal
to receive the advance payment after his return.
The formal offer to receive, shell and weigh the
! corn at the maturity of the contract was waived
| by the defendants refusal to keep any part of
| the contract. Petition overruled.
MILL - BACKING WATER NUISANCE -ABATE-
| MENT.
9107. Julia A. Williamson ct al VS.. Alfred
| Yingling ct al. Delaware c. G..
| Best, C.-Action by appellees for damages for
| backing water upon the wheels of their mill by
| appellants raising the dam of their mill beyond
| its original height Answer that appellants had
| leave to raise their dam by Petty who then
| the owner of appellees' mill, and that in raising
| the dam appellants expended $1,000 etc. To
| this answer it was replied that before any sum
| had been expended by appellants in raising the
| dam, the appellees had revoked said license. AS
| there was no consideration alleged to have been
paid for the license, it was competent for appel
lees to revoke it at any time before it had been
acted upon by the appellants. The complaint
prayed for an abatement of the height of the dam
! so that it should not ohstruct the operation
of their mill and the jury found in answer to an
interrogatory that appellants dam backed the
water upon the appellees wheels to the height of
nine inches. This finding constituted asuf1icient
basis for the order of the court reducing the height
Of the dam nine inches t6 Ind 446 IA id. ,234 40
id, 1888; 80 i'd, 1901 Judgment affirmed.
| DECEDENTs' EsTATEs-ANCILLARY ADNuMIsTRA-
TIoN
1924 Robert McCord ct al vs. Chas L.
Thompson ct al. Knox c. c.
| Black, C.-Appellants executed their note to
oF oPFpgees a@s 6amnsan 5o Of fod tn? estate a
renee county, Illinois, where their letters of adj
ministration were taken out. The note was
| given for property of the estate purchased IN
| Illinois. Answer, that there were creditors of
said estate in Knox county, Indiana, and one of
| them Joseph took out letters in that county as
| administrator the decedent having left a barrel
| of whisky in that county as assets; that claims
were duly proved against said estate in Knox
county, and there not being sufficient property
| of the estate to pay them, said Joseph demanded
payment of said note to him, and appellants paid
the same to him, as such administrator.
| Held: The administrators in Illinois, the domi-
| clI n sdp f1pt ha HpTr. XnI
through auxiliary administration in this State,
| of assets reduced to possession by them. Ad
| ministraton here could only go to the extent of
the assets left by the inteState, and the note ex
| ecuted by appellants to the foreign administrators
! did not constitute such assets. Payment was
made voluntary to said Joseph, without surren-
der to appellants of their note, which was still
| held by appeees through the bank at Vim
| cennes, at which it was made payable and where
it may have been left by them for collection.
! Judgment affirmed.
| STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS CONSTRUED.
90l3. Mechanics Building Association vs. Jon
athan R. Whiteacre. Wayne C. G.
Best, Con petition for re-hearing. The
first clause of section 297 of the Revised Statutes
applies to causes of action arising in or out of
| this State, and whenever any statute of hmita-
| ton of this State is relied upon the period of
| time during which the plaintiff may have been
nonresident, absent on public business can
| not be computed part of the period of limi-
ia ion. 90 Ind, 1873; 81 i'd, 224.) BY the pro-
viso to the section the last clause is limited to
causes of action arising outside of the State Pc
tition overruled.
DITCH LAw-APPEALs FROM COUNTY BOARD.
110l6. Martin Mehan VS.. John b. Wiles Ham
| ilton G.. c.
Franklin, C.-Under the ditch law of 1879. a
! party may appeal to the Circuit Court from
! finding of the county board that the contem-
plated work is of public utility. Isl Ind, 81
After such an appeal has been perfected, and
while it is pending, all further proceedings in
the Commissioners Court are stayed until the
appeal is disposed of. ts2 Ind, III; so i'd, 327;
| IA i'd, 2l1.) Judgment affirmed.
GUARDIAN OF INSANE PERsoN-REPLEvIN
9942 Lavina Hoke VS.. George w. Applegate,
| guardian Harrison c. Q.
Bicknell, c. C-In an action of replevin by a
! guardian for the property of his insane ward the
complaint need not aver that the ward has been
adiudged insane, nor that the guardian has been
duly appointed. (88 Ind. 530) In an action of
replevin for bills and notes, setting forth the
! kinds and amount, the statement that the same
| are in the possession of the defendant shows a
| sufficient excuse for not giving the denomina-
| tions OF specific description thereof To an ac-
| ton of replevin by the guardian of an insane
| person the defendant answered that the alleged
| lunatic at different times made gifts to her of
the money sought to be recovered. Reply that
when the alleged gifts were made the ward was
of unsound mind, and that since his appointment
| the guardian demanded'a return of such money
| and revoked any and all such gifts. This reply
was bad for failure to aver that at the time the
gifts were made the wards insanity had been
| judically declared. If not SO declared the
| gifts were only voidable and capable of
afirnance upon removal of his disability.
| 1888 Ind, $50. 1t is not alleged that the disa-
| biity continued all the time or that the contract
was not affirmed upon removal of the disability.
! Judgment reversed.
/ BOUNTY -LIMITATIoNs-DEMAND
1O6l0. E. w. High VS.. Shelby county. Shelby
&C.
Colericl C.-Action to recover bounty.money.
An offer of bounty, entered upon the records of
the county board and accepted by the party
| listing, does not constitute contract in writing
and an action thereon is barred in six years N
Ind, 553; 81 i'd, PSI; 81 i'd, III, 1907 But
xuhnrn nrfin1n he