The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1884-05-17
THE COURT RECORD.
Supreme Court-sIay &c.

non. pnbs - hOWhs NhAoL VI
COMPLAINT FOR DIyoRCE-DEFEcrS CURED BY
VERDICT.
1O941. Samuel Murphy vs.. Margaret Z. Murphy,
Warren c. c.
Elliott, IA complaint will be sustained against an
attack made after verdict if it contains statements
from which cause of action may be Inferred by fair
amendment. 1t is not necessary to use the language
Of the statute il setting forth causes for a divorce. 1t
is sufficient to plead the facts without adding mere
conclusions of law. Judgment affirmed.
JOINT DEBToRs-IUDGMENT AGAINST n
1O528. Levi Lawrence VS.. John g. Sample, Ben
ton G. Q.
Black, C.-Action by appellant against Mcbride and
Sample upon a joint promissory note. sample plead
ed that he was surety. and that there had been an eX-
tension Of the time of payment without his consent.
There was judgment in his favor, and appellant took
judgment against Mcbride. who had been defaulted.
On appeal TO this court the Judgment IN fayor OF sam
pie was reversed. Held, That the taking of Judgment
against Mcbride did not release Sample, and he may
still be pursued by appellant. A Judgment against
a joint debtor obtained in action ON the joint contract
against him alone, is a bar to a Subsequent action
against the other joint debtors. rs n. Y, 46s; Y
Ind. 206; "a i'd, 10 Bat here the plaintiff did
not elect to pursue a single one of the debtors, but
sued all of them. A judgment was obtained winch
would have been against both the defendants but Tor
the erroneous verdict in favor Of one upon a personal
defense. Giving effect to the equitable spirit OF the
code ana following the analogy OF sectlons' o-V ant
81, 1t must be held that the cause OF action against
Sample was not merged in the judgment against Nlc-
Bride. Judgment reversed.
COUNTY sUPERINTENDENT MAKING STATISTIC
AL RETURNS.
I1423. Henry A. Yearger vs.. Gibson county.
Franklin, C-AppellAnt, as county superintendent
of schools, filed a claim for nine days service in max
ing statistical reports to-the Bureau Of Statistics. The
services for which the county is liable to pay such
superintendent four dollars per day must be such as
are provided for by the statute. The duty imposed upon
him by the act creating the bureau OF statistics forms no
part Of his official duties under the school law. To pay
for such services was not contemplated by the act
creating the bureau of statistics. The person who
..o.-An H. &c. - =-ll1 .--lve,4AnAnnf falAl II
cum onore not only of existing duties, but OF such as
may thereafter be legally imposed, and subject to
such rights and liabilities as TO compensation as the
Legislature may declare. The duties imposed are
official and not particular services, within the meaning
of the Constitution. q Ind, 172; II i'd, 81 SO id,
1874. Judgment affirmed.
OBSERVATION-DISCLOSURES
1O1S6. Charles NJ. Rock VS.. Daniel G.. McClarnon.
Hancock c. c.
Bicknell, {. C-In an action for SANDER whore the
words spoken are not actionable per Sc, there must be
II colloquium averring such eXtrinsic facts as, coupled
with the words spoken, would render them actlona3ie'
Il Ind, sos; 40 i'd, 553.) The absence of a colo
quinn is not supplied by mere innuendoes attrib-
uting to the words an actionable meauding. 90 Ind.
1861 An innuendO cannot change the ordinary
meaning of language. go Ind, 395J Where no eX-
trinsic facts are averred the naked statement that the
defendant intended u sianderous charge amounts to
nothing unless the words themelves import such a
charge. (22 Ind, 1874; rs ill.,, AS; SO i'd, 100
The charge was that the plaintiff came home drunk,
offered something to his wife and asked her to take 1t
right away, but she did not take it, and some doctor
on examination pronounced it poison. There is no
charge that the thing offered really was poison and
there is no such thing as administering poison unless
it is either taken internally or applied externally.
(Roscoe Cr., Ev. 267D The charge did not make out
the crime mentioned in sec, 1919, Il. S. Judgment
affirmed.
JUSTICES COURTs-AMOUNT IN CONTROVERSY
1864. Henry C. Galloway VS.. Ms Byram ct al
Madison, c. @.
collars, Ut is well settled that a justice of tho
peace cannot render a valid Judgment for an amount
beyond his jurisdiction and that the amount de-
manded in the complaint governs the jurisdie-
ton. (64 Ind, 26O; 81 id, 10l) But where
a note for $500, dated Sep. 10, 1881, due one day
after date with interest at 3 per cent, and on Sep. ID,
1881, the defendant confessed judgment for $500, it
will be presumed chat the interest due was paid before
suit or RENTED so that only $500 was demanded
although the affidavit stated that the note was
due and unpaid. (3S Ind, SO; 6 BIKE 63@ More.
over, it was competent to plead and prove that the
note was not executed until Sep. Is, and that it was
executed on that day for the purpose of taking a con
fession of judgment upon it. A valid judgement may
be confessed upon a note before its maturity. (92
Ind, 247l Judgment affirmed.
1901. Jesse Ross VS.. Robert n. Davis: Harrison
C. c. Affirmed. Black, c.