Omaha daily bee., 1885-10-27
Late Supreme Court Decisions.


State cx rel, Grady vs.. Cemmr's Lincoln Co.
Mandamus. Writlawardcd. Opinion by
Reese j.
1--Counties and county boards can
only exercise suchpOwers as arc express
ly granted by statntc, and such grant Of
power must be strictly construed
binder the provisions of the law of
1879, now i'll force, county commissioners
have no authority to issue county bonds
for the purpose Of naising money to build
Il Jail, and Il vote 6 the people of the
county instructng tllbm to issue such
bonds will confer no authority so to do.
Chicago Lumber Cos vs.. Fisher Error from
Lancaster County, Affirmed. Opinion by
Reese, j.
1.--Where q debtor executed to his
creditor Il chuttel mortgage upon a stock
OF goods, and retained possession of the
goods. there being no agreement by
which the mortgage was to sell any part
of the goods IN the usual course of trade,
gage so to do, the fact that Il small part
OF the mortgage was, by the consent of
the mOrtgagee transferred to a third
party in payment of debt, would not of
itself render the mortgage fraudulent
and void as against creditors.
2.-Where Il chattel mortgage is given
to secure a bona tide debt, or has the
right to do SO, under the provisions of
the mortgage judgment creditor of the
mortgagor cannot, without the consent
of the mortgagce, levy upon the mort
gagged property and sell it under cxecu-
ton, and especially would this be the
case if the mortgaged property consisted
of II number of articles such as a stock of
goods The remedy would be by gar
nishee process or such other proper pro
ceeding as would reach the interest of
4 Il. 4.
mortgage was paid.
county, decree for plaintiff, opinion by
Reese, Jr.
Where husband in advanced years
conveys property to his wife for the pur-
pose of having it held in trust for hm,
and the wife, contrary to the intention of
her husband, and in violation of the
trust, conveys it to third parties, and
with the proceeds thereof or with the
money or property of the husband, pur-
chases other property and receives the
title in her own name, upon their Sepa-
ration equity may require an accounting
and make such decree AS to the property
owned at the time of the decree aS will
protect the interests of both the husband
and wife.
Holmes VS. Irwin. Error from Cass county.
Reversed, remanded Opinion by Reese, j.
When A purchased of b an enclosed
pasture, paying therefor an extra price,
the consideration for such extra price
being that A might turn his stock into
such pasture and thereby avoid the eX-
pense and trouble of having to herd his
and where the stock WAS turned into the
field and continued to run there until the
pasturage was eaten up, residing upon
the premises and in a position where he
could know of any damage being done
by the stock, and where he had
Crihbed his corn lon 2the premises and
within the inclosure In which the stock
were permitted to run, but A had no
knowledge of the eSiStpnce of the crib of
knowledge ate and d'dcslroycd the corn.
Held that A would not be liable for such
damage and that thefewas no question
of negligence on MS paFt to submit to "a
trial jury. 40 n
State ex rel. Attorney General Vs. Farmers
Etc, Insurance C0hpaDT, et al. quo war
;aiItJ. g"i"s'ivut ror piantif, Opinion by
Reese, j. ~
IA contract bySBhiGh one party for a
consideration prOmAses to make u Ger.
tain payment of mopeyupon the destruc.
ti0n or injury OF som iictbing in which the |
other party has an Interest is II contract |
of insurance, whatever may be the terms |
OF payment of the consideration by the |
assured, or the mode of estimating or Sc. |
curing payment of the sum to be paid by |
the insurer in the event OF loss.
s-'UpOn the facts appearing in the |
record, held, that defendant was IA mutual |
insurance company and MS such must |
comply with the provisions of the act of |
June |. 1873, and receive the certificate |
of the auditor of state before transacting
business.
county. Affirmed. Opinion by Reese, j.
Equity will interfere by Injunction
TO prevent the destruction OF Usage
hedge fence, by stranger to the inherit.
ince, as being such an injury TO the real
ty as cannot be fully compensated by |
lamages for the trespass.
@-QuestiOns OF fact and upon conflict
ng testimony are for the trial court TO