The Indianapolis journal., 1884-04-04
THE COURT RECORD.
Supreme Court-Aprii 2.

FRAUD,
10927. Horace Corbin ct al VS.. Geo. c. Goddard.
Franklin C-Action by the appellee to enforce
lien against notes frauduently transferred by Ritter
to Corbin The court specially found that at the time
of the transfer Corbin and had been the attorney
of Ritter, who owed him 5000 account; that Rit-
ter then being insolvent transferred notes OF the
Corbin also giving his note TO Ritter for $500 on
which he afterwards paid $4S.72. The court found
that the notes so transferred subject in Corbins
haRds to the lien of appelees Judgment. 1t is OBJ
ected that the finding of facts does not find that there
was any intention to commit fraud on Ritter cred
tors in the transfer of the notes. Under the eonl
dental relations existing between Corbin and Ritter
and tine formers professional knowledge of Ritter
business whether intended not the facts are SUIT
hcient to constitute fraud as against the other
of Ritter Fraud is a conclusion based upon facts,
and it proper to state the facts in the finding and
the conclusions therein in the conclusions OF law.
Judgment affirmed.
LANDLORD AND TENANT-CRoP RENT - POSSES
SION.
1926. Chicago & West Michigan Railway Com
pany VS.. Tillman Ii. Lnard. LaPorte c. c.
collars, J.-Action by appellee for damages for
growing crops destroyed by appellant Answer that
the land was owned by one Wells, and appellant en-
tered upon and appropriated it under parol license
from Wells, who afterward made a conveyance Of the
land to appellant and received full compensation for
all damage done 1t appeared that appellee had rented
the land of Wells for period of six years the rent
to be paid in part Of the crop raised delivered in crib
and had been in possession two years prior to the
entry by appellant. Iii contended that appellee was
n
his possession was the possession of the owner here
the relation of landlord and tenant exists and the
tenant is to pay for the of the land by portion of
the crops raised, he has the exclusive possession
of such crops, and may protect them against the
landlord and all others claiming under him. so long as
anything remains for the tenant to do in the delivery
of the landlords portion (S4 Ind 597; 50 i'd, 240i
z i'd, $50; 40 i'd, 376; Sc i'd 1856 20 i'd, 200J
Having given the lease and put appellee in possession,
the of the land could not destroy the lease nor
the right of possession under it by subsequent con
veyance to appellant. When the contracting parties
intended that the relation of landlord and tenant
should exist the contract will be lease although the
landlord is to be compensated by portion of the crop
raised. (25 CAL, 50; 81 H., 200 80 i'd. 372; 66
i'd, 245i 45 Pa. St, 426; IA Johns, 365) Judg
ment affirmed.
MARRIED woMEN-LIABILITY FOR ToRTs.
1928 Sarah Mahew vs. James Burns. Allen
Bicknell, c. C.-Action by the appellee to recover
damages for the drowning of his child in hole filed
with water on appellants premises negigently
left uncovered Under 5120 r. S., married
women separately liable for their torts as if
married. But if the complaint against wife for a
tort shows that she committed 1t by her husband d
recton or in his presence, with his consent both are
Jointly liable under section 5I21 But If the COM
plant shows such direction consent, but the
husband and wife and another merely charged
jointly Independent wrong doers such complaint
does not show joint liability as husband and wife,
and the action may be dismissed to the husband
and prosecuted as to the wife (35 Ind, $50 The
court did not err in permitting the plaintiff to testify
that he was poor man and was not able to procure
any other person than his deceased wifes sis to
take care of &s children This testimony rele
want to the question whether the plaintiff was negG
gent and that question depended upon circumstances
AL Iowa, II; '72 Pa. St, 257 60 No, 493; Tomp.
Neg. 1191.) Judgment affirmed.
LIFE INSURANCE NEUTRALITY-SUSPICIOUS.
ANSWER
10959. Penn Mutual Life Insurance Company vs.
Rosetta Wiler. Allen s. G.
Black C.-In suit on a policy Of life insurance sen
that the insured had stated in his application
that of his relatives had been afflicted with
consumption, whereas in fact, he had relatives
who were so afflicted is bad for failure to state the
and degree of relationship of such relatives.
Whether any particular person a relative
law. Where the answers to questions in the appea
ton are by the contract warranted to be true and if
untrue the to be avoided such interrogato-
ries to be strictly construed against the insurer
be capable of more than one answer, II the answer
given be in itself true though the question be such
to suggest further and more detailed answer yet if
the insurer be content with the partial
tending beyond the partial War
ranties in insurance policies always strictly
construed. C67 N Y, 1S5; 50 i'd 256; 65 i'd. g.
May ms. sec 20O.) The right of obieetng to mat
not with the death of the latter, but benefc
arY under insurance policy in suit by her the
contract has the right either to waive the statute
to object on the ground thereof. 90 Hum So; 20 n.
that at the time of making the application the de
ceased had eight full brothers, six of whom hv
ing stated in the application, but the evidence
showed without conflict that he had but full
surance must be true, without regard to its mater
aty to the intention of the person making it, (39
Ind, AIS; 81 i'd, 1872; Bliss Life ms. 34) I'm
der the instructions of the court the evidence did not
new trial should have been sustained Judgment re-
VerSed,