The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1894-01-11
THE COURT RECORD.
Supreme Court Opfuion..

1886. Mary A. Roberts VS. Farmers and
AA 9irn1ad t1 BANK ct al fountain c c;
OF creditors a conveyance is made to a
wife without consideration, then, although
she may not be actually a party to the
fraud of her husband, yet she is affected
by all the equities which might be en-
forced against him, and the conveyance will
be set aside. 2 complaint seeking to set
aside a fraudulent conveyance which
charges that the conveyance was made to
defraud creditors, and that the wife was a
party to that fraud, with full notice and
conveyance is fraudulent. 8 Where bill
gency being disclosed, it is unlawful.
1858. Robert j.: Davis VS. Charles Shuah.
dict will not be annulled or destroyed if
it can be understood by the court. Where
the verdict is for the defendant in an
the letter 81 will not vitiate the verdict.
1885,. Curtis Bass VS.: State. Lawrence
G: G; Affirmed; Coffey, -; J;mWh her the
taken in writing, or where notes of the
evidence have been taken by the judge or
rectness, or where the evidence has been
taken by official shorthand reporter
such notes or evidence may be read in cyl
dence on a subsequent trial between the
same parties. 1t is not necessary that all
the evidence of the deceased witness be re-
produced. 1t is only necessary 10 repro
duce all the evidence upon a distinct sub
Appellate Court Opinions.
sS5. c.. St. L. & P. Railroad Company vs.
firmed. Davis c. J.-Where there is fall
ure to show offer to show that the test
or experiment was maze under al the
time the injury occurred to plaintiff there
was no error in refusing to admit evidence
of such test. 2. The court reviews the In
structions asked by appellant and holds
part are too narrow and incomplete and
others are covered by those given Ross,
j., desents. 3. If the court upon objection
Of opposite counsel directs counsel address,
ing the jury to keep within the record and
complaining counsel takes no further action
there is no error.
1913 Alonzo A Munich VS.. Eber Darling
ct al. Elkhart c. G. Reversed. Lott, j.
In it's technical sense ratification of con-
tract is itself fact and not conclusion
TO be drawn from other facts or circum-
stances. Where fact is improperly cast
among the conclusions of law 1t cannot be
in the special findings. Where matters of
fact are stated conclusions of law they
no influence upon the case. Givens and
Davis, J., dissent.
1857. James Johnson VS. BENJAMIN F.
Where the court below found that APP
pellee was not acting as broker and con-
cluded that he was entitled to a commits
sion for the sale of bank stock the con-
clusion was rightly drawn from the facts.
Superior Court.
Room flames M. Winters, Judge.
Frank Beckwith VS.. Charles H. Reichert
ct al; mechanics lien. Finding for de-
John Moore VS. Esther strawbridge ct al;
street lien DismsseI and costs paid.
John Clqne VS.; Ella ,, l Me;Nimery; from
Margaret c. Howard US. Michael A. How
ard: divorce. Dismissed.
North Storms VS.. Carlo Palma ct al;
account. Judgment for plaintiff for S93.
Room 2-J. W. Harper. Judge.
August Erbrich VS.. William Smith ct al;
suit on note Tried by court Finding and
Judgment for plaintiff for $1,000.
Paul Strfebeck ct al. VS.. Jacob Ruff ct al;
mechanics lien. Cause dismissed and costs
Sandy Jones VS. l.. NJ Cox: mechanics
lien Cause dismissed at plaintiffs cost
John G. Riley VS.. Charles Loge; replevin.
On trial by court.
Room 3-Pliny W. Bartholomew. Judge.
Insurance Company of North America VS..
structs the jury to find for defendants.
Susan Mcconnell VS.. c., c., G. a. st. L.;
appeal from Osmon, j. p. Dismissed and
Criminal Court.
Willard F. Cox. Judge.
State VS.. John Simpson; burglary and
grand larceny. Trial by jury. Guilty. I'M
prisonment in the State prison for nine
State VS. JEFF Davidson: burglary and
grand larceny: on trial by jury.
State VS.. William WEIGH; burglary and
grand larceny. on trial by jury.
Circuit Court.
Edgar A. Brown. Judge.
Charles Quack VS. Christoph Brunnehol-
fcr's estate; claim. Trial by court. Allowed
r. A. Howell VS.. Ann Luckey's estate:
claim. Dismissed by claimant
w. j. Allen VS.. Ann Luckey's estate;
claim. Dismissed by claimant.
Egan a Treat VS.. James Il. McElWaine's
estate; claim. Trial by court Allowed for
Charles J. Kuhn VS.. James B. McEl-