The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1893-12-20
THE COURT C O
Supreme Court Opinions.

1898. State ex rel. Cunningham VS.. AL
bert Helms ct al. Hancock c; c; Reversed:
Helms, trustee of Sugar Creek township,
Hancock county, Indiana, for a debt In be-
half of the township is the note of the
in violation Of Sections 6006 and 607, X. s.,
he and his bondsmen are liable for the
amount so received and converted. 3. The
remedy subsisting in a state when and
where the contract was made and is to be
performed is a part of its obligation, and
any subsequent law OF the State which so
affects the remedy as substantially TO even
lessen the value of the contract is forbidden
by the Constitution and void.
165O7. Archibald Y. Comstock ct al VS..
firmed. McCabe, J.-Where the promise was
under a previous obligation to pay the debt
both legal and moral. his promise to do SO
veyed TO her from himself through the in
tervention of a third person in payment
and sufficient consideration.
1896. Elias \. McClanahan VS.. Sarah G.
Williams ct al. Sullivan G, c. Affirmed.
Hackney. j. Where q wife did not join in a
conveyance of land by her husband upon
his death, she became the absolute owner
of one-third thereof, and Of this ownership
could not be deprived by his will. 2. The
rule that even when it was shown that a
will existed, but Ii was not shown what us
position it made of the estate of the testator,
the estate would rest under the law ana
upon the right p~resumptious in favor or law,
was not changed by Sec. AIS, II. ;. 1881. pro-
viding that where a husband dies testate
the wife surviving shall take under the VIII
unless she elects in writing TO take under
the law. 3. Whatever may be SAID OF the
effect Of the removal OF disability OF Gov
eture upon the avoidance OF deeds Dy IN
fantS. where their interests conveyed are
ABSOLUTE. il does not change the rule exist
ing before such removal as to those inter-
ests that are inchoate and agalnst Wnicn
the statute of limitations does not begin TO
run until the happening or some contingency
making such interests absolute, and permit
ting their enforcement -.
l6553. Margaret Longacre ct al. MI
chael J. Stoves ct al. Elkhart =. g. Al
frmed. Howard, c.. j. = "A company 10
charge legacies against reai estats hos
heen had upon the testators estate or
whether the estate has been settled Is de-
fective. 5rau,
q Wood. Administrator. Kosciusko Z. Z.
Dismissed. Coffey. IAN appear from d
proceeding by an administrator TO sen ledi
Estate TO nav debt and seeking to set ASIDE
fraud 1Ient conveyances as a mere incident
thereto should be taken under the dece-
dents act and not under the cooe. ~
l7O35. Oscar Johnson ct al. VS.. Martina
Rooney ct al. Fulton G. G.. Dismissed.
AppeIIate Court Opinions.
1912. John II. Hochstetter VS.. .Mosier. &
Co. CLAY C. c. Reversed. Reinhard,. j.
II a company operating a coa a. n nravent II
from falling in as required by the ACT OF
1SS5. and an injury resulted 10 a miner WIN
out his fAuII the COIiipdIy 10 htD 800 N
question whether the act of 1881 repealed the
act of 1885 can make no difference.
800. Hasselman Printing Company vs.;
William III. Fry. Marion s.. Z. Affirmed
Davis. c. the verdict Is correct on
the evidence the judgment will not be re-
versed upon an erroneous instruction.
on Charles w. Kennedy VS.. Aaron A.
Graham. administrator Montgomery Z. Z.
reversed Ross, the evidence
tends TO establish a fact, and is undisputed
~ the court by it's findings or the jury by
tbeir verdict decide contrary TO sucn EVIL
| dance this court will grant a new trial.
Superior Court.
Room flames M. Winters. Judge.
Ebenezer Sutton VS.. City of Indianapolis
| ar al: damages. Jury returned verdict foI
| plaintiff for 500. ,
Indianapolis Brewing Company VS. WI
| liam Seeking; account. Judgment for plain
tiff for $685. 70.
Law G. Goss vs. Citizens Street-railwaS
| Company; damages. Dismissed and costs
paid.
Room 3-Pliny w. Bartholomew, Judge.
Wolf Sussman VS.. William Schwartz
damages. Jury finds for defendant
Circuit Court.
Edgar A. Brown, Judge.
John L. Smith VS.. DePauw University
on contract. on trial by court.
Lewis Miller VS.. G. Aultman & Co.; re
ceivership. Edward L. Kenney appointed
receiver.