The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1886-10-15

Hon. G. v. Howk. Chief Justice.
The following opinions were rendered Oct IA:
RENTs-REvERsIoNER-AC
1862 VIM. w. Watson va. Joseph S. Penn.
Montgomery G. c. Affirmed. Mitchell, j.
Where a testator had made lease, the life
tenant under the will took her estate subject to
the lease and the will, which created the life es
tate, giving the reverson to another. the re-
versioner has the right to collect the rent under
the leass. which fell due after the death of the
testator and his life tenant, incident to the
real estate, against the personal representa-
chattel real, and cannot be assimilated to &C
counts until they have accrued or become due.
Observation-Disclosures
1859 John Parkhurst ct al. VS.. Watertown
Steam-engine Company ct al. johnson c. G.
Affirmed. collars, Jas between the as
signor and assignee, by the assignment of part OF
the notes, the assignor assigns the mortgage,
not pro rata but pro tanto; he does not assign q
proportionate share of the mortgage security,
but so much as is adequate for the payment OF
the notes assigned. The assignor thus surren-
ders any preference he may have by reason of
the notes retained first becoming due. Having
assigned the notes subsequently becoming due,
he cannot in equity enforce his prior lien as
against his assignees But that postponement
does not change the priority or the liens held by
the assignees, nor in any way change the rela-
lions of those liens to each other. In such case
the subsequent liens will be adjusted as though
there had been no prior lien in favor of the
mortgage. That is. the notes held by the as
signee will have preference according TO the date
of their maturity.
NEW TRIAL AS OF RIGHT.
12043. Joseph J. Warburton Richard NJ.
Crouch ct al. Boone G. c. Affirmed. Elliott
IA suit to revest title in an owner whose land
had been obtained from him by fraud and subse-
quen tly conveyed to a fraudulent grantee is not
an ordinary suit TO set aside fraudulent con-
veyance and subject lands to the claims of cred
tors but the title to the land is directly in iss
and new trial as of right is demandable. Il. J
Where the court refused motion for such new
trial but granted it on the second motion, while
the proper course was probably not taken, yet
there was no available error.
MISUNDERSTANDING
13045 Henry A. Skaggs We. State. Mont
gomery G.. G.. Affirmed. Howk, G. il ''That
an interpreter appointed by the court was In
competent was question Of fact and not Of law,
for the ultimate decision Of the jury. 1t is
within the discretion of tho court to appoint an
additional interpreter. u. Indictment for as
sault and battery with intent to commit rape.
question was propounded to the prosecuting
witness, who was deaf and dumb, through the
interpreters, which shocked her mate modesty,
and she fled into an adjoining room, where she
was followed by an interpreter, without direc-
ton of the court and without objection, who
succeeded in getting an answer, which she re-
peated to the jury. This is not fairly an in
frlngement or the constitutional right OF the &C
cused to meet the witness face to face while tes-
tifying If it were erroneous the question Is
not given in the record and there is no showing
that the appellant was injured. 3D. When
new trial is asked on the ground of newlydis-
covered evidence it must be shown that the
moving party could not by the exercise of reas
enable diligence have produced the evidence at
the trial, and the facts showing reasonable dill
gence must be stated; the statement of mere
conclusions will not suffice.
1902. Henry Stevens Reuben Murphy.
Wabash G. c. Dismissed.
1902. William Sunderland ct al vs. Andrew
Martin ct al. Delaware G. c. Motion to dismiss
overruled.