The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1884-03-08

FRIDAY, March Z,
TRUST EsrArEs-EouIrY III

TRUST ESrATES-BQUITY JURISDICTION.
$3.50. James NJ. Boyd VS.. James L. Caldwell
Henry G. c.
Hammond, J.-EH Davis provided in his will that
$4,000 should be set apart in trust for bis Gin
ton the trust TO be committed to such trustees the
Probate Court might appoint This was a suit by aO-
pelant, such trustee, against appellee former
trustee of the fund to part of the trust fund
unlawfully converted by him. Appellee contends that
section 10, of the decedents act of 1852, q r. s
1876, 537 requires that the action should have been
brought within three years after the filing of appel
lees final report. There is nothing in this statute
any other extending its provisions to estates under
the charge of persons specifically designated
tees Such estates have always been under the
troll of courts of equity and such control is clearly
recognized by statute belonging solely to the euu
able jurisdiction of courts (Sections 1913 70.
80. '9S 80 90, go, 81, R. s. 1881 The fact
that the will vested the power of appointing
in a court having probate jurisdiction did not dvest
the equitable jurisdiction of the court the trust
The answer that more than three years had elapsed
since the filing OF appellee final report and Tho com
meneement of the action therefore insufficient.
Judgment reversed.
LEvY-SCHEDULE-DUTYO OF CoNSTABLES
11168. State ex rel vs. YIN. Read. Posey c. c.
Elliott IA justice is responsible for the official
conduct of special constable appointed by him, and
for his negligence is liable his official bond. Or. S.
1881, 400 In action forfeiture 10 levy an an.
swer which shows that the Judgment defendant was
entitled TO exemption and filed such schedule as the
law requires is good The schedule is not the ounda
ton of the defense and need be set forth in the
answer. ca Ind, 273.) constable is bound at his
after tender he is Il trespasser. e Blkf, 27J) He
cannot dispute the truth of the schedule but must set
apart the property claimed, though the debtor
property not exhibited in the schedule (6I
Ind, "a; So id, 1873; so i'd, $500 When an officer
is sued for failure to levy and it appears that the Of
fcer has accepted in good faith a schedule from the
debtor the schedule should receive liberal construc-
ton Judgment affirmed.
-COAtPLAINT-BfL oF PARTICULARS.
$50 Stansbury w. Lennon VS.. Alex Moore.
Noble G. c.
Niblack, J.-Appellee's complaint for seduction of
his wife by appellant charged that the defendant on
the I'd of October 1873 and on other days and times
between that day and the bringing of the suit de-
bauched and carnally knew the plaintiffs wife A
motion to require the complaint to be made more
specific by charging the particular times at which
the alleged illicit intercourse took place overrued
The action is analogous TO action of trespass and
belongs to that class of actions in which contneundo
may be laid and in which proof of the wrongful acts
any day within the time covered by the complaint
may be made a Phil. Ev., 500; 2 Greenl Ev sec
624) There nothing in the code of 1852 neon
sistent with the rules Of pleading and evidence thus
stated. bill of particulars will not be ordered in an
action for tort. 90 n. Y, 176; Abb Pr N S.
23S; Duer, 659 Mess. and W., Sl3.) The in
structons when taken together express the law cor.
rectly. Judgment affirmed
The following were also decided: