The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1886-10-13
THE RECORD OF THE COURTS.
Supreme Court.
Hon. G. V. Eowk. Chief Justice.

Supreme Court
Hon. G. V. Eowk. Chief Justice.
| The following opinions were rendered Oct II:
MASTER AND Observation-Disclosures
| 12256. L. S. & NJ S. Railway Company vs.
John Stupok Porter C. G. Reversed. Howk.
c. J.-When servant shows in his complaint
| that the injury for which he sues the master
WAS caused by the negligence Of his fellow-ser
want, he must also allege in his complaint either
| that the master had not exercised ordinary care
/ and prudence in the employment of such fellow
servant or that it had retained him in its service
after it had received notice that he was negli-
| gent in the discharge of his duties. The servant
| should also aver that he had no knowledge of the
negligent habits of the fellow-servanJ. An allie
| CATION that he Twas wholly unacquainted WITH"
| ETC.. does not meet this objection. e. The
| complaint shows that the plaintiff was employed
on the construction train Six weeks, during
| which time the fellow-servant through whose
/ negligence it is claimed the injuries occurred
was the engineer, and no excuse is alleged for
remaining in the service of the company after
he knew. ought to have known, of the
gineer's negligence. The complaint is bad for
failing to allege an excuse
| JOINT owNERs-sURErY-RELE
1862. James WATSON VS.. Martha Hodshire.
Montgomery G. G. Affirmed. Niblack, j.
| Where joint owners of land gave a mortgage on
| it to secure a loan of money, and, one
having paid his share of the loan,
| the other becomes nsolvent and his
interest is sold for delinquent taxes, the pas
| sive negligence of the mortgage in allowing the
land to be sold, and thus losing her lien, will not
release the other joint owner from liability for
| the amount unpaid.
OBSERVATION-DISCLOSURES CREDITORS.
| 1892 Samuel T. Wells VS.. Charles T. Ben
| ton. jackson g. G. Reversed collars, j.
| In 1860 one Conner sold to one Thompson 200
acres of land. By mistake only sixty acres were
| conveyed. the description describing but sixty
~ %1nwo
| cepted the deed and took possession. In 1871
one Harrel recovered judgment against Thomp-
| son, and the 200 acres were levied on. Wells
becoming purchaser at the sale in 1872. IL 1879
Wells assigned his certificate to the 200 acres to
Samuel Wells, appellant here and plaintiff below
| TO quiet title. In 1879 he took sheriff's deed,
and held possession of the entire tract until this
suit. The mistake in the desert ption was discov-
cred in 1877, and in 1879, upon request from APP
| peliant Conner refused to execute deed cor
| rertng the mistake to THOMPSON. Later he, for
| $3.50. executed deed to the wife of Thomp-
son for the 140 acres omitted. 1t was recited in
the deed that the consideration was to be paid by
paying two judgments against Conner in favor
| of one Benton. After the death of Thomson
| his wife conveyed her interest to appellant.
| Held: That the wife of Thompson, by her deed
| from Conner, became the absolute owner Of this
! land free from any and all Judgment liens in
favor of Benton, and that by her deed to appellant
she invested him with complete title as against
any claim that could arise out of the Benton
Judgment
RAILROAD NEUTRALITY-SUSPICIOUS..
1880 L., N. A & G. Railway Company vs.
Albert L. Pedigo. Marion S. O. Affirmed
Mitchell, J.-Where a conn plant against railroad
for personal in uries, resulting from car falling
through bridge. charges that the bridge was
wholly unsafe and dangerous to run an engine
anc train over the same, there is an issue ten
dered which made any evidence relative to the
condition of the bridge at the time it fell, the
manner in which it was supported during the
progress of repairs going on, the weight of the
train and the rate of speed it was being ron,
competent part of the res gestse. e. Inter.
rogatories which invite the jury to express opin
ions involving questions of law, and which would
have no effect on the general verdict should be
refused g. 1t not sufficient for the railroad
company in such case to show that it used proper
means and appliances in the repair of its bridge
The necessity of the required 1t to show that
In the use OF those means the utmost practical
care and diligence had been observed, and that
no degree of care usually and practically appli-
cable to the work would have discovered the
probable cause and prevented the disaster.
OBSERVATION-DISCLOSURES CE-DEoREE-UsER.
1861. Wilson H. Cleveland vs. Joseph Oben-
chain. Whitley G. c. Affirmed Elliott, j.
The court. on an appeal from a survey made by
the county surveyor as the surveyor appointed
by the court. may hear parole evidence in regard
to the description. r. When a decree gives
construction to deed forming of the links
in a partys title it Is competent evidence, even
though the decree may not be conclusive as
against strangers. e. When land is described
az bounded by an existing road street it is to
be construed referring to actually opened
and in use by the public Where road has been
opened and used for long period of time a
vendee who buys property described as bounded
upon it cannot be affected by the fact that it was
not laid out according to the original order. a.
1t is competent to prove the length of time
road has been laid out and used by the public.
Superior Court