The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1886-12-22
THE RECORD OF THE COURTS.
Supreme Court.

supreme Court.
Hon. Byron X. Elliott. Chief-justce
The following opinions were rendered yesterday:
DEvIsF-REsTRAfNT OF MARRIAGE.
1928. Sarah Summit vs. Catherine J, Yount ct
al. Morgan G. @. Affirmed Howk. J.-Where, in q
will the devise is to the wife, so long she remains
my widow, such words words of limitation. and
not condition, within the meaning of Section 1857,
which provides that devise wife with condi-
ton in restraint of marriage shall stand but the
dition shall be void.
wILL-PARoL gvIDENcE-MIsTAKE.
12S46. Grace E. Pocock ct al vs. Charles E.
Redinger ct al Marshall G. O. Affirmed Elliott, G..
IA testator stated: Il the east half of the
northwest quarter of section Sd, and hereby give
and bequeath the same" etc. It was shown that the
testator did not the east half but the west half
The mistake appears from the face of the will and
parol evidence necessary to prove that he had
made a mistake in drafting his Will.
Observation-Disclosures.
1887. Thomas G. Ayres ct al vs. Perry A. Ran.
dali ct al. Allen S. O. Affirmed, Mitchell, j.
Where purchaser assumes the payment OF debt
owing by his vendor to third person. where he in
terms expressly agrees to pay off incum-
brance on the land purchased out of the purchase
price such agreement inures to the benefit of the
creditor, and may be enforced in equity. But where
an agreement provides that the vendor will cause
mortgage the property Sold which he claims to be
paid to be satisfied and il case he does not the ven
dee to retain what he psd to discharge the SAME out
of the amount represented by the notes it is not en-
forceable under the rule,
PRACTICE - EXECUTOR VOID SALE sUBRoaA-
1922. Coleman Duncan, administrator, vs, Lou.
lisa j. Gainey ct al. Lawrence G. G.. Reversed. Nib
lack, JWhen leave is asked from this court to take
appeal after year from decisions affecting deced
ents estates the better practice to give the opposite
party notice of the application but both parties have
been brought into court by of the appeal the
order will be treated adjudieated matter. {2
Where a sale of real estate is made by executor
without any authority conferred by the will or law
the real estate is not discharged from liability to be
again sold under proper legal proceedings for the
payment of decedents debts. The purchaser becomes
the owner subject to it's debility to. be sold. The
amount paid by him being applied to the payment of
of the original debtors.
WAREHOUSE - MINGLING WHEAT - INNOCENT
PURCHASER.
12S43. VIM. a. Preston ct al. VS.. Martin v. With
erspoon ct al. Gibson G. c. Affirmed collars. j
Where persons deposited wheat an elevator to re-
ceive equivalent amount and kind and which was
mingled with other wheat and sold publicly they
clothed the elevator owners with the apparent right
and title to sell and they will be estopIed to assert
their title against innocent purchasers who bought
in the usual course of business
Lucian Ell. Richardson. Madison and Josiah r. Con-
rad, Danyille, were admitted TO practice
Superior Court.
Room l-Hon. Napoleon b. Taylor, Judge
David w. Foster vs. John Comingoer; appeal. Judg-
ment on verdict for Sails.
Josiah Mcmillan John L. Bailey ct al; fraudu.
lent sale. On trial by jury
NEW SUITS.
New Albany National Bank VS.. Andrew j. Hay;
complaint note. Demand, So, 900.
Peer Uhl vs. Frank Elfe; complaint on contract
Demand 81 500
Harry f. Orvis ct al VS.. VIM Clark ct al complaint
on account. Demand 81 900.
Sinker, Davis & Co vs. Alex. Mcknight ct al; CON-
plant account. Demand, 500
Circuit Court.
Hon. A. @. Ayres Judge.
VIM. Lewis, jr., John HI. Thomas ct al; suit in
attachment. On trial by Jury