The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1888-11-13
The Court Record.
Hon. VIM. Il. Niblack, U. J.


1926. o. & NJ. Railway Company vs.. Matilda
Hill, Administrative Clark e. G. Reversed.
collars, 1.-THE appellee sues to recover from
the railway company damages for negligently
causing the death of her decedent at q street
crossing. The failure OF appellant to sound the
whistle or to ring the bell approaching the
crossing was negligence, but as the evidence
shows that the injured person did not exercise
the requisite caution before going upon the
track, he was guilty of contributory negligence,
and a recovery cannot be had. By exercising
ordinary care the decedent could have avoided
injury.
1925 Chicago & Atlantic Railway Company
VIZ. Joseph ID. Barnes. Porter G. G. Affirmed.
Elliott, J.-Where a railway company obtains
right Of way through farm, and in considera-
ton of the grant agrees to erect and maintain
secure fence. it 10 bound to pay for animals
killed by its trains Ia cases where tho animals
enter upon the track through the fault Of the
company in failing to fence the crossing In ac-
cordance with the terms OF the contract. Its
not necessary to a recovery that the plaintiff
shall prove that the gait at the crossing was not
left open by him, or by o wrone-doer. This is q
matter of defense. The plaintiff need only prove
the contract, the breach and the resulting loss.
1891 James A. Downward VS.. Henry Hadley
ct al. Hendricks, c. c. Affirmed Mitchell,
Jan attorney who is employed to perfect or
defend q particular title to land can neither.
during the continuance of that employment nor
after its termination, without disclosing the fact
himself of Information acquired, which it
was his duty TO acquire while In that relation,
and purchase an outstanding title for himself
and set it MP In hostility to that which he was
employed to perfect or defend. The obligation
of fidelity which an attorney owes 70 his client
is continuing one, so far as respects any mat
ter which has once been professionally COM
mitted TO the attorneys confidence, and when
the matter involved Is the title to land, good
faith and public policy require that any existing
adverse title which the latter may thereafter
purchase shall be deemed to inure to the benefit
of the client or the clients vendee.
SUPERIOR COURT.
Room lion. N. B. Taylor. Judge.
Peter NJ. Pursell ct al. VS.. Geo. II. Rehm;
from Smeck j. p. Cause dismissed.
Robert Law vs.. Frsd'k Miller, ct al; on &C.
count and for receiver. TRIAL by court
Stoughton j. Fletcher, ct al. vs.. John Teller;
on note. Finding for plaintiff for s226 As.
Room 2-hon. d. w. Howe. Judge.
Mary A. Dittemore vs.. John W. Dittemore; di.
vorce. On trial by the court.
Room s-Hon- Lewis q. Walker. Judge.
Katie Steward VS.. Andrew j. Steward; d.
vorce. Dismissed.
Benjamin Sanders VS.. PIainfeld e Carriers
burg Gravel-road Company; damages Dis
missed by plaintiff.
Elmore Hughes vs.. Elizabeth Hughes di,
vorce. Refused
Ida Alexander VS.. Alfred NJ. Alexander; d.
vorce. Decree granted plaintiff
Ee1v Suits Filed.
Peter Webb VS.. Edward Hawkins ct al; CON-
plant for damages. Demand. $1,000
John W. Richardson VS.. Edward Hawkins
complaint for damages Demand. $1,000.
Joseph Payne vs.. Edward Hawkins; COM
plant for damages. Demand, So, 900.
Emma Carter vs.. Citizens Street-railroad
Company: complaint for damages. Demand.
So, 600.
W. B. Michael ct al. VS.. Thomas D. Scott;
complaint on notes. Demand, $500.
Daniel c. Lefeber vs. Sarah E. Young ct al;
suit to forscloss mechanics lien. Demand, $50
Ira Rush VS.. Edward Hawkins ct al; com
plant for damages. Demand, 5000.
Highland Wilson vs.. Mary e. Habing ct al
complaint to foreslose mechanics lien. De,
mand, s5S
Elizabeth Schmidt va. the German Mutual
Insurance Company of Indiana; complaint fol
damages Demand, $500.
Charles II. Hoffman Va. Horace B. Makepeacs
ct al; suit on account. Demand, Sl69.
CRIMINAL COURT.
Hon. William Irwin. Judge.
State VS.. Harvey Lock; robbery. Trial ty
court Acquitted.