The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1884-05-28
SUPREME CoURT--MAY q.
coUNTrEs-LIABILrY roh DEFECTIVE BRIDe

COUNTlES-LfABlLFFY FOR DbFECFlNE BhlD9hS'
1870. Commissioners Gibson County Garrett
Emmerson ct al Gibson G. c.
Niback 1.-THE highway act of 1883 contains GER
tain provisions, but these are merely auxiliary 10
the general powers of county boards roads and
bridges, and do not relieve these boards OF amy re
sponsibiEty which formerly devOlved upon them on
account OF defective or unsafe bridges. section
of the act of 1850 concerning the erection and repair
of bridges continued in force section ZS92, H.
S. and has not been superseded by any of the merely
supplemental provisions of the act of 1888. County
boards still have a general supervision over the
bridges of their respective counties and when either
township trustee supervisor onlits to give bridge
within his territory proper attention It IS the duty OF
these boards the omission to be supplied with
out unreasonable delay $50 Ind, $50; 81 i'd, 500;
80 i'd, As; Ind L. Mag. 273) The county was liza
Bile for the negligence committed in letting the bridge
become defective TO break down under appellee
team Judgment affirmed,
DEcEDENTs EsTATEs-sTATUTE OF LIMITATIONS.
1870. Lon A. Epperson VS.. David II. Hostetter,
administrator. Montgomery G. c.
collars, ITO the claim of widow against her de-
ceased husbands estate upon account, it was
swered that the claim did not within six years
before the bringing of the action. This answer was
held good. By sec. 298, R. S., in cases where the
debtor has died the limitation is extended beyond six
years. 80 Ind, $40; 81 i'd, 267.) This is not
where the plaintiff should be required to plead
the exception to the statute. demurrer will not be
sustained to a complaint the ground that it shows
cause barred by the statute unless it also appears
that the does not within any of the excep
tons where there were such exceptions. t67 Ind,
So: Sc i'd: 352: 80 i'd, II3J Where the complaint
answer setting up the statute simply will be in
sufficient (35 Ind, 124) In view of the instruc-
lions of the court it be said that the in
overruling the demurrer to the answer was harmless
Judgment reversed.
CRIMINAL PRACTICE BEFORE JUSTICES.
1929. Scott Sturgeon VS.. Jacob Gray. Warren
&C
the time in which justices shall render judgment, APP
plies only TO civil actions. Ind L. NJ, 321. There is
no statute fixing the time in which after finding or
dict hall ba nv IA
criminal eases. 80 Ind 1922. Where the punishment
may be Imprisonment the accused must be present at
the beginning of the trial; his subsequent voluntary
absence does not prevent the from proceeding as
far the return of the verdict. IA Ind 49, 16 id,
$50. But the accused must be present at the rem
dition of the judgment. (Sec. 1S01. Where two per-
tried jointly, the rendition OF Judgment
against one who is present does not prevent judg-
ment from being afterwards rendered against the
who was absent. (39 Ind. 36). And a delay of more
than month between the verdict and Judgment does
not invalidate the Judgment. The accused has the
Judgment. (39 Ind l. so id, $780, 81 i'd, 4501. An
appeal taken after verdict but before Judgment
is a nulHty and does not take the case
to prevent him from rendering judgment on the YER
dict Where it appears that the plaintiff is in custody
upon process issued upon final judgment by court of
competent jurisdiction, and that the term of commit
ment has not expired no court or judge in proceed
ing of habeas corpus can inquire into the legality OF the
Judgment the discharge of the prisoner Sec lll9,
r. S. Judgment reversed.
SALE OF BUILDISG-RIGHT OF REMOVAL.
1923. orson Rogers VS. Moses R. Cox, Henry
&C
Elliot, J-Where a building is not a permanent
one and annexed to the freehold and is sold with
a right of removal the contract although verbal,
will justify the purchaser, who has fully com
piled with his contract in entering and removing the
building. parol license to the purchaser to remove
the building is coupled with interest and cannot be
revoked II Ind. 265) The sale of a building with
the right of removal is not necessarily the sale of
interest in land within the meaning Of the statute of
frauds 81 Ind, Ia II i'd, 400 Where the effect of
the contract between the parties is to
impress upon the structure the character of per-
sonalty it takes that character browne Stat Frauds,
sec. 233 10 Ind 233; Ill Mass, 297; 8 Me-, 12.)
Judgment affirmed.
The following cases were also decided. abstracts of
which will appear hereafter:
1O445. +. H. & [. Railway Company VS.. Elisha
Pierce. Parke c. C. Affirmed Hammond J.
1O933. C. ". Runnels vs. Daniel Kaylor. Hunt
ington G. G. Reversed. Nblack, j.
11147. George w. Fleetwood VS. Dorsey Machine
Company Decatur C. G. Affirmed Elliott j.
1924 VIM. Edwards VS.. D. D. Dykeman. Cass
c. c. Affirmed Howk, j,
1929. Edmund Jassen Lake County. Lake
c. C. Affirmed Howk, j.
1852. David Long VS.. The State. Shelby c. C.
IN.