The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1895-04-03
the police station to be held until she can
be Committed to the reformatory.
THE COURT RECORD.
supreme Court.

supreme AOuEts
1886. Jones, Treasurer, VS.. Cullen. Marion
5. c. Reversed. Jordan. il complain.
that contains several specifications should
be demurred to separately. ?. The court will
construe the complaint as proceeding upon
the theory which is most apparent and most
clearly outlined by the facts ALLEGED B. Two
modes are provided for converting boards OF
commissioners: First, the regular session at
the time and place designated by the stat
ute, and second, by either a written oral
cali or notice pursuant to the statutes l.
BY jurisdiction of the subject matter is
meant jurisdiction of the class of cases to
which the particular one belongs. .. A per-
son seeking relief against a board of COM
missioners should not be guilty of any
laches. s. A party may appeal from void
of its invalidity.
1888. /. 2. 4 W; Railway Company vs.
Monks. il To prove title by sale on ex-
ecution order of sale the purchaser
or order of sale and a deed . Any debt or
thing in action legally or equitably assign
able may be levied upon when given up by
the defendant, and sold on execution in the
same manner as other personal property. 8.
When a suit is brought upon a chose in ac-
ton of any. kind or with regard to personal
property of any kind, the specific title al
legged must be proven as laid, the same as If
the action was brought for real estate. 4.
read as evidence. 5. An erroneous ruling
may be corrected by a correct judgment on
the facts found.
Floyd G. c. Affirmed Per Curiam.-Judg-
ment affirmed subject to a remittance agreed
upon.
1905 Senhenn VS.. City of Evansville. Van
derburg S. c. Reversed Howard, il. The
court at its discretion may prepare and pro-
pound TO the jury proper Undergraduates, to
be returned with the general verdict. 3 A
city which suffers an obstruction to remain
Tor an unreasonable length of time upon its
streets or sidewalks so that the city might
be presumed to have notice of the obstruc-
ton. will be liable therefor to the same ex-
tent as If the city had itself placed the OBJ
struction upon the highway in the first in
stance 3. The use of street for deposit
OF building materials can exist only in case
OF necessity, and after taking due precau-
ton not to lnJure any person lawfully using
the street for public travel. A. 1t is prin1a
tac1e negligence in a city to allow lumber to
be piled in its streets.
17217. Renolds VS.. L., n. A. & c. Rail-
way Company. Putnam Z. G. Affirmed. Nc
Cabe e. when a contract is reduced to
writing the legal presumption is that the
entire contract, as finally. settled. is en-
Draced therein. and all oral negotiat tons or
stipulations between the parties which pre-
coded or accompanied the execution there
OF are to be REGARDED as merged in it, and
1t is to be treated the exclusive medium
OF ascertaining the contract by which the
parties bound themselves. 2. Parol contem-
poraneous evidence is inadmissible to con-
tradict or vary the terms of a valid written
ains me n the Writing takes up and re-
tract, leaving nothing to be supplied by
extrinsic evidence.
Company. Clay G.. c. Reversed. Hackney,
1.-The. consideration expressed in written
contradicted by parol evidence.
17271. Furniture Company vs.. McGettigan,
receiver. Marion G. c. Dismissed.
Appellate Court.
1916. Coal Company VS. Clemmitt Greene
c. c. Appeal dismissed Reinhard, J.-If the
appellants brief is not filed within sixty
gay tn the clerk shall enter an order dismiss
a written request that the cause be passed
1859 L., n. A. & c. Railway COMPANY
VS.. Stephens. Porter c. c. Reversed. Davis,
IA person who attempts to cross rail-
ee b does OF tn mot oo a fo
listen, is guilty of contributory negligence
1853 L., N. A. & c. Railway Company
hearing overruled.
1649 Wysong VS.. Neals. Boone c. C.
Motion to dismiss appeal overruled.
Superior Court.
Room John l.. McMaster. Judge.
Paul Kraft VS.. Peter H. Noon ct al; on
note. Judgment Tor plaintiff for $1O7 So
Charles Loewer VS.. II. Lieber Company;
damages. On trial by jury.
Room 3-Pliny w. Bartholomew, Judge
John A. Ford VS.. John V. Coyner APP
peal from Walpole j. p. On trial by jury.
New Suits Filed.
Granville M. Ballard VS.. John Dugan ct
al; suit on note Superior Court Room 2.
al; suit for damages. Superior Court,
Room 1.
William Young VS. City of Indianapolis
ct al; suit for damages. Superior Court,
Room 2.
Lyman Y. Curtis VS.. Morris Richardson:
suit on account. Superior Court, Room g
Charles M. Hoffman VS.. Flora NJ Hoff-
man; suit for partition. Superior Court,
Room 3.
Rebecca Guile VS.. The City of Indian
apolis; damages. $1,000 demand. Superior
Court Room 3.
Annie c. Merriman VS.. Edward B. Mer-
rlman; suit for divorce. Superior Court,
Room 3.
Belle Q. Ford VS.. Elmer E., Ford; suit for
divorce. Superior Court, Room 1.
sylvester Johnson ct al. VS.. Board of
Trustees of Irvington; suit for Injunction
Superior Court Room 2.
Charles Hendricks VS.. George Coble; suit
for damages. Superior Court, Room l.
William c. Ripley VS.. George ]. Young;
damages. Superior Court Room 3.
Joseph c. Skeen VS.. The Daily Record
Company ct al; suit on note and to fore
close chattel mortgage Superior Court
Room 2