The Indianapolis journal., 1894-03-10
THE COURT RECORD.
Supreme Court Opinions.

1870. Harry Bowsser. Administrator. VS.:
for frpef1 rehearing eG overruIed. io Howard 6. J~
!. Under the terms of the will the widow
did not have the right to dispose of the
pellee 2. The defense that the plaintiff is
not the real party in interest, and hence
has no right to sue, must be especially
pleaded in bar, and this right is waived on
appeal no less than on trial.
1000. Hiram Kerlin VS.. Isaac Reynolds,
Auditor, ct al Carroll arr G; c. Reversed;
trustee do not relate to highways and schols
within a city in this township. 2. There is
no authority gxe1 tb to tax tax f fhe people OF
of interests within and relating alone to
the city in it's distinct corporate capacity,
and those interests peculiar to citizens and
property outside such city must find sup
port alone from those of the township as
distinguished from those of the city: Such
treated distinctly. 8. Where citizens and
property of city are interested equally
with those of the township outside such
city tax may be assessed within and
without such city for such purpose. f. Sec.
1895, r. s. 1881, is to be construed as apply
ing to the property of the township as dis
tinguished from that within the limits of
the independent municipality, in the alb
sence of a common interest between the city
and the township. 5. The property of cit
izens of city is not subject to levy for
the purpose of maintaining cemetery for
the use of all the inhabitants OF a town.
ship in burying the dead.
Appellate Court Opinions.
1927 L., N A. & c. Railway Company
VS.. William Johnson. Washington G. G.
Reversed. Davis, 9: il. a demurrer for
want of facts sufficient TO constitute a
cause Of action does not raise a question
of whether the killing of the animal for
which action was brought occurred in the
county where such action was commenced.
2. Such question is raised by motion in
arrest of judgment on authority of Toledo,
Wabash & Western Railway Company VS..
1915. William Price VS.. George w. Boyce
Administrator. Upton c. c. Affirmed.
Reinhard, il. The doctrine that the
plaintiff must recover secundum allegata
ct probata, if at all, does not stand in the
way of a recovery when different para
is introduced in support OF all the para
. graphs. but which is sufficient only to sus-
tain one of such paragraphs. 2. The evil
dence in the case is sufficient to sustain the
verdict. 3. The failure TO give certain in
structions is not reversible error where
the special findings. of the jury. show that
such instructions, if given, would not have
availed the party claiming under them.
97s Indiana Farmers Live Stock Insur-
ance Company VS.. Larkin A Byr<ett. Cass
c. c. Reversed. Lotz, J.-1. 1t is not nee
essary 10 file a copy OF an application for
insurance with a complaint on the policy
2. Various theories may be presented by
the policy of insurance denominateS proviS-
ions in policy warranties. they may be
of Indiana Farmers Live Stock Insurance
Company VS.. Rundell (Afirmed, "a n. f.
Ref, 5SS) the provisions in this policy which
the insured is charged with violating are
held to be representa- tions and not warran-
ties. 4. If fact is in dispute or the evil
dence concerning it conflicting the court
instructions without invading the province
OF the jury.
Room 1-James NJ. Winters, Judge.
Curley Taylor VS. Thomas Powers ct al
damages. Jury returned verdict for plaint-
iff for $500.
William H Corbaley VS.. Consumers Gas
Company; damages. on trial by jury.
Peerless Manufacturing Company VS..
oliver A. Keeley ct al; note. Dismissed.
Room 2-J. W. Harper. Judge.
Daniel Foley VS.. Amelia l.. Smith; sewer
assessment. Cause dismissed and costs
James South VS. Emil Zumpfe; sprinkling
assessment. Cause dismissed and costs paid.
Fred ]: Neitzel VS. Lewis Baum; suit for
satisfaction OF mortgage. On trial by court.
Room 3-Pliny w. Bartholomew. Judge.
William Kraus VS. Charles Reichert ct al.
mechanics lien. On trial by court.
Circuit Court.
Edgar A. Brown, Judge.
Isaac Bigelow, by Next Friend, John L.
| Bigelow, VS.. William NJ. Levy ct al; dam
John l.. Bigelow VS.. William NJ. Levy et
al; damages: Demand, 5000. Dismissed
Jacob NJ. Hauch VS.. John F. Farley; to
be released from constable's bond. Re-
| leased.
New Suits Filed.
Ida Haugh VS.. The Citizens Street-rail-
| road Company; damages. Demand, $4,000
Superior Court, Room l.
Edwin II. Hibbitt ct al. VS.. Lemuel j. Car
| ter: note. Demand, 800. Circuit Court.
Central Electric Company Novelty
| Electric Manufacturing Company; on draft
| Demand $325 Superior Court, Room 2.
Western Furniture Company VS.. Frederick
w. Frank; on account. Superior Court
| Room 3.
| Madeline G. Boyle VS.. George y. Boeck-