The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1885-03-21
THE COURT RECORD.
Supreme Court, march 20, 1885.
POINTS Or Decisions


No. 1873. VIM. PIERCE VS.. Martin Higgins
ct al. Shelby G. C. Affirmed. Elliott, Jap
pellee Higgins sold appellant some land. Previ-
ousy judgment leifl had been decreed on the
land. Higgins had appealed from the judgment
to the Supreme Court with appellee Coliett as
unsuccessful, the land was sold under the judg-
ment. and appellant, to protect his title, pur-
chased the sheriff's certificate Held: That the
surety would be entitled to be subrogated to the
the judgment, and therefore he holds superior
equity as against the appellant.
No. 1850. John T. Carr, Administrator, vs..
Carmican Hays. White G. c. Mitchell, j.
Dismissed under sections 2454, 2457 r. S., 1881.
No. 1867 John III. Hildebrand ct al. VS..
Robert C. McCrum Huntington G. C. Affirmed.
Best, Gu For a paragraph of complaint
sufficient as charging false Imprisonment see
opinion. e. A demurrer defective in form
should be overruled but if it be sustained to an
insufficient answer the error is harmless and
will not work q reversal.
No. 117O9. Hayden Yelton ct al VS.. VIM. Add
son ct al. HenryC c. Reversed. Black, C.-The
appellees, under section 5035, r. S., 1881, petit
toned the Board of Commissioners to order a
certain road, alleged to have been used for
twenty years. entered of record and to be kept
in repair as other highways already established
1t was ordered. The appellants appealed to
the Circuit Court, and, appearing by their at
torneys, moved to dismiss the cause, because
there was no notice given of the filing Of the
petition in said cause, nor of the petitioners in
tention to present their petition in said cause to
the Board of Commissioners, nor did these de-
PENDANTS have any notice thereof before the
hearing and determination thereof The mo-
ton to dismiss was overruled Held: That the
parties whose lands were to be affected were en-
titled to notice, and, none having been given,
the motion to dismiss should have been sus-
tanned.
No. 1926 Isaac Moss vs. State for the use of
Mann, Drainage Commissioner. Howard G. G..
Reversed. Franklin, Gu The drainage act of
1881 was not repealed by the act of March g.,
1883 The latter act was intended only as an
amendment to certain sections of the former,
and as such the amended sections, as amended,
became parts of the original act, and are to be
enforced as SUCH And where proceeding to
establish drain was pending at the time
the amendatory act went into force, all
subsequent steps were governed by such act.
~ Under the act as amended the report of the
Commissioner of Drainage, as approved and con
firmed by the court. creates the lien, and it
therefore becomes the foundation of an action to
enforce the assessment, and must be made part
OF the complaint The subsequent assessment
made by the commissioner having charge of the
work, by apportioning the amount of the lien
that shall be collected by instalments, must be
ayerred. but need not be made an exhibit.
No. 1882 Reuben Vaught vs. Board Of Com
Reversed Colerick, C.-Where bridge on a
public highway is maintained by township,
which permits it to get out of repair, whereby
one without negligence is injured the county is
liable to the person injured.
No. 10000. Union Mutual Life Insurance
Company vs. James Buchanan Marion S. G.
Petition for rehearng
No. 1851. VIM. A. Bristor ct al. w. Esther A.
Bristor. Marion c. G. Petition for rehearing
overruled.
No. 1922 Abner Eel. Bowen vs. Peter Striker
ct al Carroll G. G. Petition for a rehearing
overruled.'
No. 1174S. Henry DIPPED ct al vs. Geo. j.
hearing.
No. 1897. Isaac G. johnson vs. Elijah Kitch
ct al Grant G. G. Petition for rehearing