The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1886-03-10
THE RECORD OF THE COURTS.
United States District Court.
hon. w. A. Woods. Judge.
To-day-No special call.
Supreme Court.
Hon. w. T.. Niblack, Chief-justice.

Supreme Court
Hon. w. e. Niblack. Chief-justice.
The following decisions were rendered March o.:
l2o3L Patrick Carmody ct al VS.. The State
Ripley c. G. Affirmed. Niblack G. J.-Action
on forfeited reeognizance. Il. J The authority
of deputy to take recognizance in the name
OF the sheriff will be presumed; that he had none
Is matter of defense. ~ When an
answer in such action AYERS that the
court made no order directing the
snerlH to take continuing recognizance, as
failure to aver that the surety did not desire to
enter into such recognizance renders it bad.
when the answer AYERS that there was no such
order and no desire of the surety, but fails to
aver that the surety did not voluntarily consent
TO the execution OF such recognizance, it will be
presumed he desired to enter therein and that the
execution is admitted. g. Courts may make
general orders fixing the amount of bail which
shall be thereafter required during given term
IN certain classes of baiable offenses, and may
enforce such orders in all cases except where the
exercise of discriminating judgment is by some
means specially invoked some question is
made upon the alleged injustice of it's operation
in parncular case.
120lS Ernest L. Hasseld ct al VS.. George
Seyfort, assignee. Owen c. G. Affirmed FOL
lars. J..Under the voluntary assignment stat
utes, when personal property is omitted from
the schedule filed with the. deed
OF assignment whether by mistake
or otherwise, and is afterwards sur
IcHuoicu 10 the trustee or Is taken possession
OF by him as part of the estate, he may, as
against executions subsequently issued and
levied, retain and dispose of it in the execution
of and for the purposes of the trust
I20S6 Benjamin Price ct al. administrators,
vs.. Nancy NJ. Jones. Cass G. c. Affirmed.
Elliott, I'LL Suit upon an instrument read
ing: $4,000. September, 1881. One day after
my death promise to pay to the order of Nancy
M. Jones S., 900. to be paid out of my estate,
for balm received, without any relief from val
uation or appraisement laws, with 6 per cent in
terest from date until paid, and attorneys fees.
BENJAMIN Price, Held, promssory note.
u Where parties agree upon a consideration,
and 1t is one of indeterminate value, the courts
will not substitute their iudgmentfor that of the
parties. but will uphold the contract. 49, Where
there is an express provision to pay for services.
an action will lie, although the promise was
made to one of the prornisor's family. a. J The
note entitled plaintiff to attorneys fees and no
specific demand was necessary.
11455. Edward D. Pugh ct al. vs.. William A.
Pugh ct al Fayette G. G. Affirmed. Howk,
J.-Where a will provided in certain contin-
gency that one-half of the property devised should
go to 'the children of Catherine Stewart" the
word children" must be understood in its pri
mary sense where there any persons in ex
istence answering the meaning of the term, and
it will not be taken to denote grandchildren
1858 Laban nj. Rice VS.. City of Evansville.
Vanderburgh @. c. ReLearing granted.