The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1892-11-29
The Court Record.
SUPREME COURT OPINIONS.


The Court Record.
SUPREME COURT OPINIONS.
1850. l., d. & w. Railway Company VS..
Benjamin A. Sands ct al Marion :. &.
Affirmed. Odds. IA cause as to parties
entering into an agreement and consenting
to q Judgment will not be considered In
this court on it's merits. but it should be
affirmed where the court had jurisdiction.
The fact that the judgment rendered is
broader and to some extent without the
Limits of the allegations of the complaint,
can make no difference. z Where the
evidence in q cause was concluded n an
endeavor was made between counsel for
their respective clients to enter into an
agreement IN regard to the final Judgment
that should be entered by the court. and
an agreement was drafted with q final de-
cree TO be entered which was signed by
some of the parties. and attorneys for 9th
ers Endorsed the decree 20. K" and signed
held, under these circumstance, such par
ties consented to the decree.
1888. James +. Lindley VS.. Walter l..
Sullivan ct al Vsnderburg T.. e.. Re-
versed. Miller. G.. J.-While good plead
ing requires that In an action upon Q note
providing for attorneys fees the value of
the services should be stated, evidence
may be admitted without such averment
ana q recove had for such fees. provided
the whole recovery does not exceed the
oa1O4hs liz
In the complaint. q Where two defenses
are joined, one triable by the court and
one by q jury. the fact that the trial was
had and evidence introduced only under
of the court submitting the cause to q jury
made at the inception of the trial erro-
neous. 8. In the absence of a special con-
tract the duty devOlves uDon the holder OF
notes held as collateral security OF using
reasonable but not extraordinary diligence
IN their collection. and upon q failure to
realize the money due thereon through his
own laches. the amount lost may be
charged against him as a payment on the
debt. The mere lapse OF time and the fact
that claims have not been collected do not
of themselves necessarily show q want of
reasonable diligence.
1921. Nm. A. Bunker VS.. Robert J.
sullivan c. e. Reversed. ELL
Farmersburg. the lower part of which was
occupied by him as q store-room and the
upper part was leased to q lodge of Odd
fellows. A walk ran along the side of the
building. and this was usually traversed
by lodge members in going to and depart
ing from lodge meetings. The stairway
was reactAd by ascending q platform raised
several iEches above the walk. A barrel
was rolled upon the walk near the plat
form, and. in coming out of the lodge at
barrel and was thrown down. The barrel
seemst to ave been placed there by an
agent of appellee in discharge of his gen.
eral duties. The question whether or not
the barrel so encroached upon the walk as
TO make 1t dangerous was one OF fact for
the Judgment of the jury, and 1t was error
to admit the opinions OF witnesses on that
point. 2. Remarks made by a judge in the
presence of the jury during the progress of
O trial, If material and improper. consti-
tute p~reJudiciai error.
1890. Martha T.. Leggett ct al. VS.. Abra-
ham LoZier. Ohio G. T.. Reversed. COT
fey, IA complaint for the recovery of
possession of real estate. which does not
contain o su fi Client description of the land
sought to be recovered, is bad on demurrer.
2. The complaint states no cause of ac-
tion against appellant LegQett, nor docs it
pray any relief as TO her. 1t is insufficient.
1857. Charles Expert ct al. VS.. Mary A.
Hall. Clay e. G.. Rehearing denied. Nc
Bride, J.-Delivery of a note may be con-
structive and yet as ef1ectual to pass title
as if 1t were actually placed in the hands
OF the peyee.
COURT.
Room 1-Hon. Napoleon b. TAYLOR. Judya
Mary NJ. Robbie. Guardian, VS.. James B.
Bright; for rents; on count. Finding for
plaintiff for Sl24.9z.
Grover G. Hinman. Trustee, VS.. Mary L.
Lindsey ct al; foreclosure. Judgment for
plaintiff for S755.5a. Decree of foreclosure.
divorce. Decree and custody of children
granted plaintiff.
Mary +. Grothe VS.. Chas. ii, Grothe; d.
vorce. On trial bv court.
William A. Taylor OF oil. va Indianapolis
Manufacturing and Supply Company ct al;
on account. On trial by court.
Room 2-Hon. James w. Harper. Judge.
National Bank of Rockville, Ind. VS..
Mercy hurry ct al; suit on notes. Tried
by court. Judgment for plaintiff for S10.-
4SS40.
Stella o. scanlon vs. The City of Indian
apolis; suit for damages. On trial by jury.
Nesc Sttsfs Ftied-
E.. Bement x Sons vs.. The j. A. Everitt
Seed Company; suit on account. Room 3.
John Rounds VS.. State of Indiana ct al;
habeas corpus. Room /.
Josie Ryan VS.. Harry H. Ryan; divorce.
Room
Kellar Lumber Company VS.. Mercy MUIR
~ and Lewis Holloway; suit on draft.
Room !.
Byron Hutchinson ct al. VS.. Merchants
Dispatch and Transportation Company;
damages. Demand. 500.
George w; Keyser VS.. Dr.. Russell Kelsey;
mechanics lien. Room 2.
CIRCUIT COURT.
Hon. Edgar A. Brown. Judge.
w. A. Rhodes VS.. Town of Brightwood;
to quiet title. On trial by court.
James III. Baldwin, Administrator. etc.
VS.. James Murphy ct al; TO foreclose equity
In real estate. Decree ordering sale of
property.
Eli r. Ritter VS.. Leonard HinkIe: libel.
On trial by jury. Hon. Pliny w. Bartho!-
omew, judge of Superior Court. p~resldingD
Ner Suits Fued.
Susan f.. Edwards vs.. Supreme Lodge X.
of Il. of the World: suit on policy.
Edward Brewer rs. Charles A. Webb ct
al; mechanics lien.
CRIMINAL COURT.
Hor. Willard F. Cox. Jndza
State VS.. Annie MeMath. Hattie Stone.
.Nettie Hobbs; assault and battery, with