The Indianapolis journal., 1893-09-20
The Court fsscord-
SUPREME COURT OPINIONS.


1922. Louisville. New Albany & Chica-
60 Railway Company Vs. Josephine Z.
MalOtt ct al Monroe &. T.. Affirmed.
Howard. J.-Affirmed on the authority of
100 Ind. II, Hoosicr Stone Company VS..
MaloJt.
1GSl9 Lewis Natural-gas Company va
State ex rel, Reynolds ct al. Henry g. e.
Reversed. Coffey J.-Towns in this State
have no power 10 regulate the price OF
natural gas furnished TO it's citizens. City
of Rushviile va. Rushville Natural-g gas
Com pany. l32 and 515. overruled.
lG2i0. Jeremiah Nj. KlinRer VS.. George
+. Lewler ct al. Marshall &. G.. Affirmed.
Sh0ckney, J.-Where land is affected by a
ditch assessment and the description 10
erroneous. while the assessment is enforce
able as against the then owner. It is not
against one VINO holds from q good faith
purchaser. and who had notice of the prior
equity. as he would acquire the same title
as that of hts vendor.
APPELLATE COURT OPINIONS.
GA. Julia b. Smith Vs. Mary j. Downey
ct oil. Marion 5. &. Affirmed. Davis, J.-
!. The doctrine of resadj djudicata as 10 per.
sons who are not parties 20 the record can
only arise by virtue of some issue gained
OF contest made In the name of another.
2. The stock OF n noDresidelt In q foreign
corporation. created and existing by virtue
of the law of another State cannot be gar
nisheed In An action in court in this
state when the certificate of stock Is held
here IN trust.
SIS. Geo. Cooper ct al VS.. Hannah Peter
son. Marion :. &. Dismissed. Ross. j.
For the failure 10 give the notice required
by the statute to coparties not Joining In
the appeal. this appeal Will be dismissed.
945. John w. Ross eft AL. VS. William ID.
Conwell. Fayette &. &. Affirmed. Rein
hard. IA provision in q Will that the
trustees should fix their own compensa-
tion does not give them unlimited discre-
tIon, and their action thereon is subject to
Yeylew hV tho probate cOurr.
S93 Bradford Shinkle ct al VS.. John ID.
ShearmaD ct al. Marion 5. e. Reversed.
Lotz. j. When tender is pleaded with q
profert, tho article must be in court, not
only with the pleading but upon the trial,
so that the court may render a proper Judg-
ment protecting the rights of all the par
ties iItigant. ?. When stipulation 10 he
performed or a thing TO be done rests upon
one party To IA contract aud Is independents
of any obligation resting upon the oppo-
site party, the tender must not only DO
strictly made, but must be kept good in
order TO effect discharge OF the contract.
8. Every composition TO be complete must
have III il the element of accord and satis-
faction.
Dismissals.
72s. Oscar L. NeIsler VS.. George w.
Moore. Marion 6. G.
7S5 L., n. A. ~ G.. Ry Com pany vs. Cur
tis Bass Lawrence &.
1893. Edward Beerhonss ct al. VS.. w. u.
Telegraph Company. nm OK &. Z.
SUPERIOR CDCRr
Room flames NJ. winiers Judge
Margaret J. Rentsch VS.. George X. Hut
ton et al; replevin. Dismissed by agree
ment
Fred Beetcher VS.. Henry S. Fox et al;
note. Judgment for plaintiff for s2SL62.
Room 2-J w. Harper Judge.
John Il. Stnmph VS.. Joseph NJ. Layton et
al; foreclosure OF mortgage. Dismissed
by plaintitf. Costs paid.
Henry c. PomeToy We. Lorenzo N. Perry;
foreclosure of mortgage. Tried by court
Judgment for plaintiff for S222 go.
Room 3- Pliny w Bartholomew, Juiga
Ora Neler vs. William Neller; divorce
Granted on cruelty.
Neio Stiis Eaed
Charles Jackson ct al. vs.. Michael Sells
ct al.; on account. Room .
Lawson b. Specs vs. Sarah T.. Specs; di-
vorce. Room s.
Daniel Foley va. John Henry Meyer et
al: street lien. Room Q
Esther a. Brist0r VS.. David Il. Cooper et
al.; quiet title Room3
Cora NJ. johnson VS.. Edgar johnson: pc
tit,on TO modify decree. Room2
tion VS. John w. Morgan ct al; TO forscloss
mortgage. Room !.
CRIMINAL COURT.
MilIhrd n. Cox Jaixa
State VS.. Martin Morgan: assault and baa-
terry with intent 10 kii.. On trial BY juWs