The St. Charles herald. [volume] (Hahnville, La.) 1873-1993, 1884-09-13
COMMERCIAL LAW.
.l, Briof Dieests OF Late Decisions.
Compiled Specil@ly Tor the Midland In ius-
trial Gazette st. Louis, Mol

ExEcUTIoN--PARTiEs IN INTEREST MAY
AGREE WHAT PURCHASE MAY
EMBRACE.
A, b and G owned certain tract OF
land, each an undiv ded one-third. As
interest was passed by a sale under
deed OF trust given by him, and d be,
came the owner OF such interest, sub
ject TO q Judgment against A and ID,
which was prior lien To that OF the
| trust deed. ID became the purchaser
| at the sale under D ecution OF this
Judgment. l. having later Judgment
against A and y. after the expiration
| Of twelve months, redeemed from the
| first execution sale and levied upon the
| land and to keep d from bidding at
| the sale, by an arrangement with y
and u, agreed to bid OH the land on his
execution, and that the sale should in
no manner affect the title held bysD
| to The undivided one-third of the land,
or the interest Of A, he had bought
under h deed of trust. In this case,
Kell VS.. Worden appealed 20 the SUI
preme Court of Illinois, Il was held
that the contract was valid and bind
ing one and that Il by his purchase ut
the Sheriff sale, acquired only BIS uni
divided one-third of tho land.
LIFE NsURANoE.-FALsE ANSWERS IN
APPLICATIONS
The insured stated in his application
that'noue of his near relatives had been
afflicted with consumption, whereas,
in fact, he hal near relatives who were
so an icted The answer In the suit on
this polieywas hold u be bad for fail
ure to state ihe.napesand degree Of nea
lationship OF such relatives. The near
ness OF such relation within, tho mean
ing Of the contract is u question OF law.
Where the answers 10 questions IN
the applicat on are by the icons
tract warranted TO be true, and II un-
true the contract Is To be avoided, such
questions are TO be strictly construed
against the insurer II there Is any
ambiguity In question, and the AM
swer In itself be true though incom-
: plete, the insurer, II content with the
: partial answer, cannot claim ware
ranty extending beyond such partial
answef.-1he Pennsylvania Mutual
| Life Insurance Company vs.. Wilder,
! Supreme Court Of lnliana.
PARTITION - MoRToAGEE's MFR ST.
When d testator explicitly directs his
, executor to sell his real estate and di@
vide the proceeds among his child en-,
their interest Is no more than u right to
receive share OF the proceeds, and
an instrument In the form OF n mort
gage, purportlng to charge the mort
: oaror's interest In the land, operates
. only as an assignment Of the share
: which will be due to him when the con
version is nc iually made; but il, instead
: of a sale hy the executor, there Is II par
tition of the land itself by the benes
!, iiciaries, such an instrument nj once
obtains all the force of mortgage
upon the purport allotted to the mort.
pagor, It's lien dating from the day
when It was recorded. II alley VS.. The
Allegheny National Banx, Supreme
Court Of PennsYlvania.
= PROPERLY soLD-PRoFITs FROM Es
+ Property was sold to II by order of a
4 court OF bankruptcy; he not paying for
:. IL. the court, without notices vacated
y the order of sale, and made an order
!, selling it TO g, who paid for ID and
II went into possession OF IL. aAfterWnrd,
!. on review, the sale TO Q was set as de
!. aud the sale 10 II reinstated. II, hav-
ing paid for the property, received pos
session OF Il, and afterward the money
y paid BY G was repaid to him, and suit
y brought by II TO recover the profits
- derived from the use of the property
J, while Chad it, Judgment having beet
- awarded II by the Circuit Court Of th'
United States for the Northern Dlstrlc
Y Of Illinois, G appealed to The supreme
~ Court Of the United States whore tb'
r decls on OF the lower conrtwas reversed
q the opinion of the court being ut
al was not liable TO pay TO II tire profit
derived by him from the use OF tn
no property while he had II.
o. FRAUDULENT sTATEMENT.
~ ~ A merchant who furnishes 10 mer
~ camille agency statement OF his vi
-. fairs for the use Of the agency Is re
80 sponsibe to those whom IL reaches
and who are influenced by 1t, and !
IN case his representations are false u
Ve order Of arrest founded on them wi
w be sustained. So held by the Generi
NJ Term of the New York Supreme Goul
M in the recently decided case of Schu
~ VS.. Harris. #.
"a BRoKER-wHEN ENTITLED TO CONN
DIV sIoNs.
49,. In order TO entitle q broker to con
Ihe missions for procuring purchaser
oa- propefty on specified terms, he mt
~ DfOunte ~ pGtoOh iDNeAJ "AAN' '''t1 -
aw purchase on those terms, according
i. the decision Of the supreme Gour
,ile Minnesota in the recently decided ca
nv. Of Hamlin vs.. chnlts. ..
the PRINCIPAL LIABLE FOR ACTS OF AGEN
ace ace The Texas Court Of Appeals, ip a !
eue cent case, held that where q prime 7
see nuts it in the power OF his agent
son make contracts or TODD acts appalri
T. ly within his authority. which result
injury to innocent third persons or
ate. the principal, the law will impose I
sht, loss upon the latter.
~ SUIT MAY BE BROUGHT BY AGENT
y, PRINCIPAL. s4sf
"a A cont act not under seal made W
an agent in his own, name for an !
he dis Tossed principal may be sued up
,os. by either the agent orthe principal,
he cording to the decision OF the Ma
COZ land Court Of Appeals in the recen
No. decided case OF the Baltimore |
WV Tar Manufacturing Company
Fletcher