The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1884-06-02
THE COURT RECORD.
Supreme CouPt-May 20.
Hon. Byron X. Elliot, Chief Justice.

Hon. Byron k Elliot, Chief Justice.
SCHOOL FUND LOAN TO COUNTY AUDITOR
1881. State rel. Kendall Nelson Green.
Hendricks c. G.
loan from the school fund to himself but where he
does so and executes mortgage therefor, which is
duly recorded, the State foreelose such mortgage
against q subsequent purchaser OF the property; ~
Ind, ISL; Stockwell VS.. Johnson May g. 1881 But
where it appears by answer that tina county has
funded to the school fund the full amount due upon
such mortgage upon the theory that the mortgage
was void, it is good defense to the action, as it
gage. Judgment affirmed.
GENERAL TERN PRACTICE oBsTRUcTING
STREETS
944li stanton Turner VS.. City Of Indianapolis.
Franklin, Cit is insisted for a rehearng that in
the opinion deciding the case this court placed the af
rmance of the Judgment of the lower court at gener
terra pnon different ground from that
upon which the court at general term reversed the
Judgment, The Judgment or the grounds upon which
1t Is based Of the court in general term does not be-
come the law of the case as to be binding upon
this court on appeal If So no appeal wouldbe pro
vided for Before city can be held liable for not
removing an obstruction from street, it must be
shown that it had notice of the obstruction and that
reasonable time had elapsed before the accident for
the removal of the same, that the obstruction had
continued long enough to create presumption of no.
uee. RehearlHg denied
MARRIED WOMAN JUDICIAL SALE SECRET
TRUST.
c. G. ''''''' '''''' '''i' - N'"'''~' >''''
Bieknell c. C.-under the code, so faras the proofs
concerned cases formerly of equitable Jurisdiction
stand in general upon the same footing as common
law cases and the rule of this court that upon dis
puted questions of fact, verdict finding will not
be set aside whore there evidence tending to sup
port IN material point is of universal applea
ton. (S5 Ind, Isl, COZ A married woman is re-
gapded as purchaser, for, value of all property
$50; Pet 84S,) Who're the legal title to land sold
on execution is IN the husband though burdened at
feat the wfes claim to the onehrd vested in her by
such Judicial sale $50 Ind, sos; r. s.. secs 350S,
24S3, 2970 24S3) Judgment reversed.
Observation-Disclosures.
1851. Jacob F. Robbins vs. Ralph Mages Rush
c. c.
Franklin C-Appellant asks a rehearng in order
that he may amend his assignment of errors. The
rule is we'll settled that arehearng will not be granted
to enable party to amend the cord. go md 29T
39d., 4O9 THERE'S nothing in this case that should
take it out of the general rule After the filing of the
appeal and before the decision ample time had elapsed
for any desired amendment to be nlhfte Rehearing
denied.
PARTNERsHIP-DIsso LUTIeN-AccoUNT1NG
1o3s4. Gustave Lang Simon oppenheim- Cass
c. G..
Rest. C.--Where a partnership has been dissolved
before partner recover balance alleged to be
the claims of the firm have been collected and its debts
paid, that exist (S5 Ind, 40; SO i'd, 337;
80 i'd, 550l In such case the allegation that the
defendant took real estate Of tina rna worth 20 OdO
for which he agreed to pay the plaintiff, is not sf
cieIt it not being shown that the assets of the firm
had been collected and its debts paid The defendants
promise to pay necessarily dependent upon the
final adjustment of the partnership affairs. If upon
such adjustment, nothing should be due the plaintiff
he could not recover notwithstanding such promise
Where there are good and bad paragraphs in COM
plant aud the finding is general and docs not appear
to be based solely ON the good paragraphs the error
necessitate reversalof the Judgment (3 Ind, 375;
66 i'd, 29.l Judgment reversed.
| COUNTIES RRIpGEs-NefIeE
lea23 eomrs Allen Co. VS.. Ghas S. Bacon.
Allen S. g.
| BickneIl c. C.-where a municipal corporation is
charged with negligence in permitting highway
bridge to be dangerous, and the danger is created by
the wrongful act of another it must be shown that
the corporation had notice of such dangerous condf
ton facts must be stated from which such notice
may be fairly Inferred efa Ind 81; AZ id. 57t; IS
i'd 1861 But where the danger arises from tho aet
of the corporation itself from decay rottenness
of the structure it is sufficient to charge generally the
negligence of the defendant in the act omission
cemplsnedof and no avermeut Of NOTICES necessary.
/ (57 Ind 22S; 70 i'd, 1856; 80 i'd, 4S1 Such
poPatien is chargeable with knowledge that timber
| will decay by lapse of time and exposure to the
| weather. and ii is bound to ordinary 20 de-
teet and guard against such decay tBoardvs. Elmer
bridges IN repair. although the means of the town.
| ship may be sufficient and the township officer may
fail g. s % is d Ss ass s lns Ss "a
ceNTRAcT-BREAcH-NoM DAMAGES.
11172. Charles A. Rhine administrator, VS.. The
| ophius Norris. Rlackfsrd G. G.
Franklin C-Where two parties purchased the in
terest of third partner in sawmin and agreed
release him from all back payments the mill for
purchase money, the agreement must be construed
that the latter shcala not be bound to pay any
| thing more such back payments. But where it
does not appear that the plaintiff was ia any way
harmed by breach Of the aereemeah the complaints
could only be good for nominal damages and iadg
ment will not be reversed who're only nominal dam
ages are involved Judgment affirmed.
| INFANT sIARRIEb woMASs. DERD--DISkFFIRM-
/ ANGE.
| 1892. Emily Buchanan VS.. VIM. s. Hubbard.
| Hendricks G. G.
/ Elliott J.--Et is hrnily settled that a married wo
man may at any time during her ceverture, disafrm
! a deed made by her while an infant (2 Ind L. NJ,
| So 246; sc Ind, 57z, COZ, 80 The facts that
she lacked but eleven days of being of age when she
made the decd that she had been married four years
and that she lacked to be Of ad the grantee be
/ lieved her to be of age cannot work exception to
| the rude Such deed may be avoided although the
land has passed from the original grantee to bona hde
purchasers. The fact that she resided the land
| and had knowledge Of the character of the convey
ances not WORK estoppe nor the fact that her
grantee had made improvements. q Ind. L. NJ, S.
| 1907 Judgements reversed.
CONDITIONAL. N0TEA-PLEADFNG.
l1loa. Harmon Borcbus ct AL vs.. Huntington
| Building. etc, Association. Huntington G. G.
| BFcAlelb q. C.-Where a note IL 10 become due
cordings to conditions expressed in another instrr
ment which is referred in the note, said CONDITIONS
| not Being sisted in the n0te itself copies boSk
| of the note and the instruments peferrea
| to must be filed with the complaint
| as Ind 34S) Bat where the conditions stataa
l