The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1894-06-20
THE COURT c
supreme Court Opinions.

1924. N. Y. C. & st. L. r. r. Co. VS..
P~erriguey. Wells G. G. Rehearing denied.
Hackney, J.-The omission Of a fellow
servant which sustained no relation to the
masters relation, and which was the prox-
innate cause of an Injury, cannot create a
liability against the master.
1887. Wilds VS.. Ward ct al. Clinton G.
c. Affirmed. DALEY, IA mortgage of a
building. in the absence of language indi-
the mortgageor, passed such an interest in
the land on which it rested as was essen
tial to its use and enjoyment.
1876. Boyd ct al. VS.. Vickery ct al. Henry
c. c. Affirmed. Howard, J.-Before a fraud
ulent conveyance can be set aside it must
appear that at the time of the conveyance,
as we'll as at the time of bringing the suit,
the debtor did not have other property
from which the debt could be made.
ct lS 81: sS SGPsla q G. E ReSsaang vd den sa%% Gefs
fey, LIVERY pleading must proceed on
a definite theory.
1886: Purrier. VS.: Koontz. Montgomery C.
1850. Dougherty VS.. Hurley ct al. Parke
c. c. Dismissed.
Appellate Court Opinions.
3d. C. st. l. & P. Railway COMPANY
]. Ross, j., dissents.-In an action for
personal injuries it was proper for the
jury TO consider the nature and extent of
the plaintiffs injury, his mental and
his ability 70 follow his usual vocation,
although there was no direct proof as to
tAlC dillOullL VI SUI udIlidScS. a NIeu
there Is no evidence showing the amount
of the expenses incurred it is error to
instruct the jury as If there was evidence
in the case in SUPPORT of that averment.
3. Where a complaint proceeds upon the
theory that a railroad company failed to
give the statutory signal by reason Of
plaintiff was placed in a position of dam
ger and by reason of such negligence and
steam as concurrent acts and circum-
stances the horse driven by plaintiff be-
came frightened and plaintiff was injured.
Held: The complaint was sufficient.
1919. Dubois VS.: Board, etc. Lake c. C.
Reversed. Reinhard, J.-Where money
illegally collected by a county is still in
action to recover the same the county is
liable to refund the same.
1884; Thompson VS.. Murphy ct al. Henry
G.. c.. Reversed. Ross, IA testatrix
may provide the means for the subsistence
of her son without exposing it to his i'm
by his creditors. 2. Where a will gives
the rents and profits to a son during his
natural life the property is subject to
S21. Anderson VS.. .Oscamp ct al. Elk
hart c. G. Reversed. Gavin, IA mort
gaze will not be declared fraudulent as to
creditors at suit of the mortgage where
the mortgage is an executed one.
Superior Court.
Room flames NJ. Winters. Judge.
The Hartford Saving and Loan Associa-
ton VS.. Lola G.. Harris ct al; on note.
On tFldi Dy court.
Minnie Williams VS.. Morton Williams;
divorce. Decree and custody of child grant
ed plaintiff
ct al. Court files special finding of facts.
Finding against defendant Gilliland and for
all other defendants.
damages. Judgment for plaintiff for s36.
Otway r. YeaZell VS.. c., c., c. & st. L.
Railway Company; on account. On trial
by jury.
Room 2-J. w. Harper. Judge.
William S. Hubbard VS.. John Williams;
foreclosure of mortgage. Cause dismissed.
Costs paid.
James w. Langtree VS.. Citizens Street
$1,000.
Nancy K. Oswiler VS.. Lavina E. Creed ct
al; foreclosure of mortgage. Tried by
court. Taken under advisement.
Room 3-Pliny w. Bartholomew. Judge.
Bernhard Ellig VS.. Otto L. Somerlad
mechanics lien. Dismissed and costs paid.
Alphonsus c. Cloutier VS.. Consumers
trial by jury.
New Suits Filed.
Isaac Thalman VS.. Frederick A. w. Da-
Wis; to foreclose mortgage. Superior Court.
S. A. Morgan VS.. Arthur Jordan ct al.
to foreclose mechanics lien. Superior
Court, Room l.
II. Dixon; suit on note. Superior Court,
William d. HUFFMAN VS.. Allen Kiefer;
Oliver NJ. Thornburg VS.. The State Build
ing and Loan Association ct al; complaint
on Injunction. Circuit Court.
The Center Building and Loan Associa-
ton of Indianapolis VS.. Mary Smith ct al.
TO foreclose mortgage
State of Indiana ex rel j. A Henderson
VS.. The United States Express Company;
suit for collection of taxes and penalties.
Circuit Court