The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1889-01-11
The Court Record.
SUPREME COURT DECISIONS.


1874 VIM. H. Durham VS.. State. Mont
gOmery,C G. G.. Reversed. ElliOt,C. j. When
defendant returns fraudulent list of his
property to an assessor he is liable under
Section $3.50 K. S., and not under Section
251O.
la4T. VIM: w. Johnson vs.. Augusta
Ahrens ct al Warren, C.. C. Affirmed.
Berkshire, Affirmed on the authority of
Jones VS.. Ahern yesterday.
1876: John S. Brown VS.. Moses Wuskoff
IA transcript of Judgment recovered
before Justice of the peace may be filed at
any time during the life of the judgm ent,
but such Judgment will not be lien after
ten years from the rendition thereof.
1865. Rose VS.. Stair. Knox @. c. At
firmed. COffey, IA defendant i'll q Grim
inal case may testify to the intent with
which any act was done when such intent
is fact necessary to be ascertained.
1920. L.. n. A. & c.. Railroad Company
VS.. James Buck. Benton c. G. Affirmed.
Mitchell, J.-When a complaint by an adj
ministratOr In a complaint for damages for
the death of his intestate by the negligence
of the defendant, AYERS that said anmins-
benefit of said widow and child, who, by
reason of the death of such Gecedent, have
sustained damages, etc., is sufficient on
demurrer as showing pecuniary loss to the
wife and child.
9. A person injured by negligent omis-
sion of another to perform legal duty
would not be denied recovery even
though it appeared that the injured person
was at the time of receiving the injury act
ing i'm disObedence of his collateral Obliga-
tiOn to the State, which required of him
the observance of the Sunday law.
3. Declarations which were the natural out
growths of the act in litigation, although not
precisely concurrent in point of time if
ously made SO nearly contemporaneous as
to be in the presence OF the transaction
which they illustrate and explain and
were made under such circumstances as
necessarily to exclude the idea of design or
deliberatiOn, must. upon the strictest prin-
ciples of justice, be admissible as part of
the act OF transaction itself.
SUPERIOR COURT.
Room l--Hon. N. B. Taylor, Judge.
Darby Domaine VS.. George w. Stubs;
damages. Verdict for defendant.
Angeline X. Thomas VS.. Mary NJ Atkin-
son; for an accounting. Dismissed for want
of prosecution.
Edward III. Briggs VS.. w. l.. Woodland ct
al; account. Dismissed.
Henry Schmidt VS.. Citizens Street-rail-
way Company; damages. On trial by jury.
Room 2-Hon. d. w. Howe Judge
Daniel Foley VS.. Catherine Southern;
foreclosure; Judgment for plaintiff.
count. Judgment for plaintiff for $50.
John Bridges VS.. Perry &. Tomlinson
Judgment on verdict for $780,
Peter Lieber Brewing Company VS.. Mar
tin III. Schlosser; account. On trial by
court.
Room 3-Hon. Lewis c. Walker, Judge.
Thomas f. Brennan VS.. w. +. A. Bern
hamer, guardian; to set aside deed. Finding
for defendant.
Maud Branham VS.. Supreme Command
cry Knights and Ladies of Universal Broth
erhood; policy. Finding for $500.
VIM. III. Vincent vs. Laura +. Sprague;
account. Dismissed at defendants costs.
Grafton Peck VS.. Robert Craig; note.
Dismissed and costs paid.
st. Louis Car-wheel Company VS.. James
j. Cole ct al; note. Judgment for S30S.49.
Oscar =. SissOn VS.. Josephine +. SissOn;
divorce. Refused.
Jay VOssys. Sample Loftin, Treasurer; in
junction. Finding for plaintiff.
James s. Benson VS.. Conrad Wultl; dam
ages. On trial by jury.
NeU Suits Filed.
Maria W. Matz vs. Thomas L. Spafford
ct al; complaint on account. Demand,
500.
Rebecca A. Dawson and Marcellus Daw-
son VS.. The Broad Ripple Natural-gas Com
pany: complaint OIL contract.
Merchants National Bank of Indianapo-
lis VS.. i. 4. Zaiser ct al; complaint on
note. Demand $500
CRIMINAL COURT.
Hon. William Irwin. Judge.
State VS.. Geo. NJ. Ferrand; murder. On
trial by iury