St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1894-04-24

PA L DAILY GLCEE::
being elected from the land by the
owner thereof. such house becomes Q
part of the realty and ceases to be the
property of such licensee.
2. Ratification of the acts OF an un-.
authorized agent by neglect for an ,ln-
reasonable length of tlmet repudiate
them. is all application of the doctrine
of equitable estoppel which may be III.
v0ked against the party guilty OF such,
laches. but in his favor. <
Elizabeth NJ. vandiver RESPONDENT VS.. j, G,
oGorman, appellant. Order affirmed.
CAVITY, j.
In an action of trover by the mort.
gagor of personal property against a
mere wrOngdOer who Is a stranger to the
mortgage, 1t IS no defense that there Is
default i'll the mortgage which is held
by third party and due and payable.
In such case the plaintiff, being en-
Tilted 10 the possession Of the property.
is entitled to recover the full value of
the property converted. and not merely
the excess In value over the sum Sc
cured by the mortgage.
Hans Chustofferson appellant vs. William
Howe, respondent Order affirmed.
CAVITY, j.
When an account is stated the hal
ance struck becomes an original de-
mand, the transaction amounts to an
express promise to pay that balance,
and, except in case of fraud or mistake,
the account cannot be examined to as
certain the item of that balance.
When new note is given in settle
ment of the balance due on mutual
running accounts, OF which debt Sc
cured Inv q nnrtvo UA fOrmpH only q pprt
1t is satisfaction. and not renewal of
that mortgage.
Gust Lillyblad, respondent, vs. Charles F..
Sawyer appellant. Judgment affirmed.
CAVITY, j.
In an action against defendant on
note which he signed as surety, and
which he claims he signed at plaintiffs
request, and which Was given to the
plaintiff as payce to renew or discharge
n prior note held by third party. on
which plaintiff was liable, but defend
ant was not, and as to which defendant
claims that plaintiff was the principal
debtor.
Held. under the issues in this case it
was competent, as against defendants
objection. to admit evidence sufficient
to show which OF the parties to the last
named note were in fact the principal
debtors and which were in fact the
SuretieS.
Evidence held sufficient to sustain the
findings.
Elizabeth C. Taylor. Administrative of James
II. Taylor, deceased. respondent VS.. S.
Hess, appellant. Judgment reversed.
MITCHELL, J.
Rule applied that declarations in dis
paragement of the title of the declarant
made daring the continuance of his
title, or while the property was under
his control, are admissible as original
evidence against those i'll privity with
him.
Aleck E. johnson. respondent VS.. Helen N.
Johnson, appellant. Judgment affirmed.
MITCHELL j..
An assignment OF error not included
In the points relied on will be dee.led
abandoned.
A domestic judgment on the merits is
conclusive in subsequent action be-
tween the same parties upon all issues.
principal or subordinate, which were
actually tried and directly passed upon
In the first action.
The Register Printing Com pany, respondent,
VS.. John w. Willis and George NJ. Nelson,
partner, as Willis d Nelson, appellants
Order affirmed, MITCH ELL j
In ali action for work and labor upon
quantum lnerult the defendant cannot,
under a mere denial OF the allegations
of the complaint avail himself of an ex-
press contract as to the price as a de.
tense to the action. -,
Charles s. Nelson, respondent VS., The St.
firmed. - 30 MITCHELL j -
Evidence held to justify the verdict.
In an action by an employe against
his employer for injuries caused by. the
alleged negligence Of the latter in fail
ing to furnish him safe machinery with,
which to work 1t is not eSsentiaitO aresi
cOvery that the employe should be able
to show the precise of the defect,
if it is made TO appear that the accident
occurred by reason of some defective
condition of the machinery, chargeable
to the negligence of the employer
Frank Truntle, by George E. La Clair. his
guardian ad litem, respondent. VS.. North
Star Wooden Company, appellant. Orde
reversed. MITCHELL, j.
Evidence held not to justify the vel
dict, tor the reason that it appears that
plaintiff was guilty Of contri0utOry neg
ligence.
Even if master is negligent in not
giving his servant instructions and
cautions as to the dangers OF his EN-
ployment, yet if the servant receives
the same information and cautions from
other sources, whether from other per-
sons or from his own observation and
is, nevertheless, thereafter injured, the
negligence of the master is not the
proXimate cause of the injury.
If a servant is advised of a particular
danger and of the proper precautions to
AVOID it, it is no excuse for negligent
exposure Of himself to this danger or
for negligent omission of such precau-
tons that he did not realize the full
| magnitude of the injury which would
result therefrOm.
In the matter of the petition for a receiver
of George \. BiSsell. Lime Rock National
Bank ct al, respondents VS.. Albert d.
Geifuss. assignee ct al, appellants. Order.
affirmed G1LFILLAN, c. j.
Evidence held sufficient to justify
finding that debtor mot trader) is
insolvent within the meaning OF the IN.
solvent law.
Charles W. Elston and Charles A. Britts. CO..
partners as Elston d Britts, respondents,
vs. Aaron Fieldman, appellant. Order af-
irmed GILFILLAN, Z. j. Z
Held that the case does not show con-,
sent of the court below to try other
issues than those made by the plead
IngS.
The seller of a ticket for passage,
issued by common carrier, does not
from the sale alone undertake for any,
thing beyond the genuineness of the
ticket.
A contract held to be on a sufficient
consideration.
Hannora Lyle. respondent, VS.. Nathan W.
Prescott and John II. Dorap. copartners as
Prescott Doran. appellants. Order af-
filmed. GILFILLAN, c. j.
Assign ments of error held bad.