The St. Charles herald. [volume] (Hahnville, La.) 1873-1993, 1884-05-31
COMMERCIAL LAW.
Rrisf Digesta Of Late DNcislona.
Compiled Specially for the Midland Indus.
trial Gazette, 81. Louis. Mol
NOT ABANDONMENT

4 AVDCAty vi a. WNG ACNt8A UROU ~
the property Of b., and A. claiming
tho property as his own pointed it out
| to Sheriff, who levied upon it and took
1t into his possession. A then brought
| an action Of replevin and took the
goods, Fad the sheriff, the defendant,
set up that A., by showing tho prop
erty, authorized the levy and thereby
waived his rights. The trial court over
ruled this defense and gave tho plain
| tiif Judgment. The defendant carried
She case, Davidson VS.. Dryer, to tho
| Supreme Court Of Iowa, where the
| Judgment was affirmed. Judge Beck,
in the opinion, said A, IS act In point
ing out the property which { Sheriff
sought to levy upon was not q waiver
| Of his claim and title 10 IL. All th,ra
was of the act is this The defendant
claimed that the property was subject
to the execution and proposed to levy
upon II; the plaintiff did not concedo
this, but pointed the property out TO
| the Sheriff, and therefore his act was
not an abandonment of his title, nor
would II operate to defeat his action to
recover the property.
BOARD or TRADE CONTRACTS.
A contract for the SAFE OF goods TO 10
| delivered IL valid, even though the sell
Ter has not the goods, nor any other
means Of getting them than TO 60 into
the market and buy them; but such "
contract Is only valid when the parties
really intend and agree that the goods
are to be delivered BY the sellers and
the price to be paid by the buyer, and II
under guise Of such contract, the real
intention Is merely to speculate In the
rise and fall of prices, and the goods
are not 70 be delivered, but one party
is to pay TO the other the difference be-
tween the contract price OF the goods at
the date fixed for executing The con-
ira t, then the whole transaction con-
stitutes nothing more than wager and
is null and void.--U. y. Sup. Court.
NEUTRALITY-SUSPICIOUS. -EsToPPED.
The assignee Of mortgage, having
purchased the mOrtgaged premises and
assumed the payment of the mortgage
debt, afterwards representing the mort
gage as valid aud subslsting' and trans
fcrring il as such to purchaser in good
faith without notice of any defect, d es-
topped as against such purchaser from
showing or insls ting upon the fact Of
the payment Of the mortgage debt, or
claiming that the mortgage title has
mergedin the fee. Such estoppel ex-
tends TO the levylng creditor Of such
purchaser Of the mortgaged prem-
Uses; claiming to hold the same
under levy made subsequent to the
transfer of the mortgage. Supreme
Court of New Hampshire.
TRovER BY MoRTGAGEE OF cHArTEL.
In trover. brought by mortgagoe OF
chattel against one who took i from
the plaintiffs possession, It Is no dc.
Tense that before the mortgage was
made the mortgageor had orally prom
ised to send the chattel to the defend
ant to DO held and sold as a pledge and
security for an advancement of money
made ly the defendant to the mort
gageor, and the plaintiff was aware Of
the mortgagcor's promise when the
mortgage was made, and had received
from him, in part payment Of his debt,
q part Of the money received by him
from the defendant. Supreme Court
Of New Hampshire, case OF Young VS..
Kimball.
NOT LIABLE TO TAXATION.
Promissory notes for round sums Is
sued by corporation to its employees
as an evidence Of indebtedness for
wages, which notes;when not paid BY the
company, are not reissued, but can
celled, do not render the corporation
liable to taxation as upon notes fused
for circulation and paid OUT by the
corporation. although the persons to
whom they were issued have used the
same TO discharge their debts or to
make purchases. United States Cir
cult Court Eastern District Of Penn.
ACTUAL NOTICE NOT NECESSARY.
The Supreme Court of Indiana. In
the Gu o OF the Commissioners of Tor
ter County VS.. Dorubke, the court held
that in suit for damages sustained In
consequence of the unsafe condition Of
bridge, It Is not essential that the pub
lie officers having charge thereof should
be prov ed to have had actual notice of
the defect, but If such defect has exist
ed tor such length Of time that they
ought to have taken notice Of 1t the law
win charge them with notice.
CONVEYANCE FRAUDULENT.
In the case Of Turley vs.. Alphin, re-
, Gently decided by the Kentucky Court
OF Appeals, 1t was he'd that where an
estate conveyed by deed OF assignment
| purporting 10 be for the benefit Of cred
/, itors was more than sufficient TO pay
. all the assignor's debts, the intention
] TO hinder and delay creditors was mani
. fest, and that the conveyance was fraud
b ulent.
sURETIEs LIABLE.
G The United States ST preme Court
D holds that the taking by a United
}, States Marshal, upon q writ Of attach
ment ON mesne process against one
:. person Of the property Of another Is a
|. breach of the cond ton of his official
d bond, for which surcties are liable.
y CERTIFICATES OF DEPOSITS.
a Certificates of deposits, in the opin-
v ion of the Supreme Judicial Court Of
i Massachusetts,, are not promissory
!. notes within the meaning OF the gen
= eral statutes OF the State Of Massachu.
u sets.
d PROPERTY IN TRUST.
9 The Kentucky Court Of Appeals
Il holds that q municipal corporation
D. may hold property In frost for charita
u BILE purposes, and may be compelled t.