The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1884-02-15
THE RECORD OF THE COURTS
sunreme Oourt-Feb. 13.
HNFiUlIFU w III - VT -.
Hon. Geo. V. Howll, Chief Justice.

How Geo v Howlz, Chief Justice.
ESTABLISHING HIGHwAYs-NOTlcE-NA OF
OWNERS.
1858 James s. Mcintyre VS., Lewis Marine ct al
Porter C. c.
Hammond T-TdInction to prevent the establish
nnent Of a highway The petition for highway should
contain the of the owners occupants or agents
of the lands over which it passes. az Ind 4'2o'l
The notice OF the proposed highway Is not required 10
be personally served those interested but may De
published in newspaper, or posted vt three Oh tHc
most rrblc aces in fhe vicinity of the highway As
against collateral attack the proceedings Will be u
held unless it is shown that the petition ad Aolce
wholly insufficient TO inform those interested Oh
the proposed highway and the manner IN Mnca n. e9E
would be affected thereby (See ~ ND - o." NJ NJ
73 ID, 52l 70 id, 8 80 i'd, 63 80 ID ob Inc
owner occupant viii be presumed to know the 9e
scription Of his land and how it will be affected by the
proposed highway. The omission OF the name OIL an
owner occupant agent of land. IN the peu9on Tor
establishing highway, does not render the pIoceea t
affirmed.
DEED-FRAUDULENT ECoRDING-PURoHAsEHS-
CoNFisCATION
1071S. Charles L. Henry VS.. James larson
Madison G. c.
Bicinell G. C.-Tn 1850, Carson resident Of Ten
nessee contracted to sell to the Mooreands certain
land in Madison county, Indiana, ana gave them
| title bond, a deed to be made when the purchase
money shonld be pad The deed was left with Car
so a++,,,,a,y 10 ba daverad whom the conditions
| should be complied with Without performing the
conditions the Moorelands wrongfuly took possession
of the land, and il 1865 conveyed it to Alexander
and by mesne conveyances it came to appellant VINO
purchased for value without knowledge OF the facts
During the attempted conhScatlon OF te llI
was made on the ground that Carson was fepei' anu
the land was bought for ti8e by person IN the en-
poy of the clerk of the United States Court carson
deed to the Aoorelands was frauduently obtained by
a grantee Of the land, who after keeping it seven
years. had it recorded thirteen years after ITS daIe
Where deed is surrepdtously obtained by
grant6r no title passes 81 Am r.. 3G9) It is the
same as a forged deed. Is 1 lad rs; Pom Eq Jun;
| 735, 779, S07, S21.) The grantors title Is gooq9
| even against innocent purchaser for value and
without notice. The record of the United States Court
shows its face that its judgment Of confscation
unauthorized. After notice, Carson appeared by
attorney and fled an answer which stricken out
| for want of affidavit of his loyalty. III Wall,
! $50; 90 U s.. 27A) But the court never obtained
jurisdiction of the case because the record does not
show that any seizure of the property under executive
order made before the filing of the information
! go u s., 372; 20 Wall, 92) Judgment affirmed.
| HUSBAND AND MISUNDERSTANDING SETTLE
! BIENTs
! 9504 Thomas Rose vs.. Helen NJ. Rose Wayne
&C.
Niblack, J-Complaint by appellant alleging that
during number of years he had maintained the APP
peee, his wife. in business furnishing her with CAPT
tall that from the proceeds OF such business he had
real estate and made Improvements
therein causing the title to be conveyed to her upon
the express agreement that all the property was to be
jointly used improved and enjoyed by them and that
| the benefits which might result therefrom should
inure to them jointly atafter thus fauduently get
ting title to all the property appellee had hed suit
for divorce from appellant, and had separated from
him Prayer for equitable division of the property
between them. wife may become the trustee of her
| husband. go Ind, 239D But, where the purchaser
| of properly takes the conveyance in the name of his
wife child other person for whom he is under obi
CATION to provide, the presumption Of resulting trust
IS rebutted and the transaction will be regarded prna
face as settlement upon the nominal grantee per
ry Trusts 143) Nor viii a trust be implied if
there is uncertainty as to the in which the
extent to which the property is to be applied Perry
Trusts sec 116) There is averment what interest
in proportion of the property the appellant agreed
to hold in trust for appellant The trasacions must
be regarded postnuptial marriage settlements from
which it was expected that incidental benefits