The Russellville Democrat., 1891-09-24
REGENT DECISIONS
On Questions of Legal Importance by State
 Tribunals.
Attorneys Lien-Bank Collections-Infant Contrscts-stock shipments
 Assignment.

Attorneys Lien-The fact that plaintiffs attorneys have 8 lien on the judgment for their services, con fers on them no right to oppose 8 settlement between plaintiff and de- fendant involving 8 satisfaction of the judgment, where the settlement provides fund sufficient to satisfy their demands.-Lee V. Vacuum Oil Co. (N. Y.), 27 N. E., 1918; Id., 1920.
 Bank Collections A bank which sends a draft received for collection to ub-agents, who collect it, and remit 8 draft on third persons for the amount, which the bank then sends to another bank for collection, is liable to the owner of the original draft, where the sub-sgent's draft is not paid, and they in the meantime, become insolvent. Reversing 12 N. Y. S., 864-St. Nicholas Bank V. State Nat. Bank (N. Y.), 27 N. E., S49.
 Infants Contracts-l. A board bill contracted by an infaut to enable him to attend school is 8 necessary, the payment of which may be recov- cred of him by suit.-Kilgore V. Rich, 22 A., 176, 83 Me, 3o5
 2. If the infant procure another to pay tue bill for him, that payment is regarded ss the furnishing of nec- essaries, for which suit may be maintained against the infant for the reasonable value to him of the amount so paid.-Kilgore V. Rich, 21 A., 176, S3 Me-, S05.
 Live Stock Shipments-1. A common carrier of live stock cannot, by contract with shipper relieve itself, either in whole or in part, from liability for injury or loss re- sulting from its own negligence. - Chicago, R. I. & P. R. Co. vs. Witty (Neb. ), 49 N. w., lS3.
 2. A stipulation that the shipper shall net recove' for loss or injury unless he gives written notice thereof to the officers of the company before the cattle are removed from the place of destination, and before they have been mingled with other stock, is void. .--Gulf, c. & s. F. R. Co. vs. Vaughn (Tex. 16 s. W. 775.
 Assignm nt-One buying chattel mortgage for less than it's face value is entitled to recover ot merely the amount paid, but the whole amount due.-Rue vs. Scott N. J. ), 2l A., 1048.
 Gifts inter UiUos What Consti- tutes-1. To constitute valid gift inter Viuos, there must be such a transfer of the subiect-matter as will pass the donor's title st once to the donee, absolutely and irrevocably divesting the former of and investing the latter with all of the donors 8 right or title therein and control and dominion thereof. vs. Hoagland (N J) 21 A., 1054.
 ?. The actual delivery of negotia- ble bonds, with words or acts indi- eating a present absolute gift, con- stitutes valid gift inter viOos. - Matthews vs. Hoagland (N. J.). 12 A., 1054.
 Carriers Limiting Liability-1. A provision in 8 contract of hipment that, when the carrier furnishes the shipper with laborers to assist in loading and unloading his goods, they shall be deemed the shippers servants, while so engaged, and that the carrier shalt not be responsible for their acts, is void, as an attempt to release the carrier from responsi- bllity for the negligence of his own servants Missouri Pacific Railway Company vs. Smith (Tex ). l6 s. w., sos.
 2. A stipulation in through bill of lading that the railroad shall not be liable for loss caused by negli- gence beyond it's own line, is void - Gulf, c. & s. F. R. vs. Vaughn (Tex. ). 16 $. w., 775.
 Officers-Sp Special authority to act for corporation can be conferred by the board of directors only in it's collective capac- ity, when convened as such board, and not by the assent of indi- vidual members -Filon vs. Miller Brewing Co.,, 16 N. Y. S., 57.
 Contrscts--A deed purporting to be the deed of corporation author ized by law to have and use com mon seal, which is not sealed with the corporate seal, is void.-Dan- vile Seminary vs. Mott (Ill ), 2S N. E 54.
 Innkeepers-A guest at public inn may retain pcrsonal custody of necessary wearing apparel; and jew elry worn daily by her need not be deposited with the innkeeper when not in use, to make him liable for it's loss by fire. Fay vs. Pacific Imp. Co. (Cal.), 26 P, 1899.
 ------s-----@~~----s----