The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1895-01-11
THE COURT RECORD.
Sunremc Court.

171S7. Gum Elastic Company VS.. Mexico
Roofing Company. Marion Z. Z. Afhrmed.
Monks, Ill. Where a recovery Is sousnt
on a note. mortgage or other contract IN
writing, our code requires tnat a copy, OF
the same be filed with the pleading, put
when the cancellation or legal destruction
of such an instrument is demanded this
rule does not apply. 2. Facts ana not CON
illusions must be averred. 3. The renditlon
than the sum stated in the affidavit In at
tachment proceedings does not deprive the
justice of the peace of jurisdiction nor rem
der the Judgment void. If such an action
of a justice was erroneous the judgment
could not be enjoined, the court having
Jurisdiction of the parties and the SUBJECT
matter.
1880. Mckinney VS.. Frankfort & State
Railroad Company. White o.. {. Pet1-
An order will have no binding effect upon
a person when he is not before the court.
17126. Dallen VS.. McIvon. st. Joseph G. Z.
Transferred to Appellate Court. Hack
ney, j. 800
1885. Case VS.. c., G., G; & st. L. Railroad
il. If a verdict be silent as to any, par,
ticular fact it stands as though round
against him upon whom rests the burden
provision for nonliability in any case where
the claim is not presented within a given
time, the failure to present such claim
must be pleaded specially and is not adj
missable under a general denial. Such a
provision must be regarded as a condition
precedent, performance Of Whlcn must ne
good against demurrer. 3. Common carriers
have a right to contract with the shipper
for a reasonable time within which, notice
of a claim for loss or damages shall be
given.
1850. Chapman VS.. Elgin, Joliet & East
versed. Davis, IA complaint that AYERS
that the appellant performed work ana
labor in grading, e~Seavat,ng ana aon rs sa,d
railway between said stations OF the value
and to the amount. of - dollars must pc
1888. Henwood VS.. State ex rel. otrlepy.
Kosciusko c. c. Affirmed. Reinhard, J.
When the burden of proof is upon a party
to establish his plea in abatement, 1t is
within the province of the trial court to
say where the prepondheg5n mInist nes; VS..
Meeks, Administrator. Delaware =. =.
Appellee's petition for a rehearing.
Superior Court.
Room John j.. McMaster, Judge.
l.. O.. Fulmer ct al. VS.. Harry. r., VIII
Robert Fl. Kyle VS.. Conrad H. shellhouse
ct al: account. Jury returned vero1ct ior
Mark 4. Smith VS.. Andrew J. Reed;
notes. On trial by jury.
Room 2lL, NJ. Harvey, Judge.
Hiram w. Miller, Trustee, VS.. j.. T. Ca
dell; suit ON note. Dismissed at plaintiTs
cost. -.
John G.. Payne VS.. ii. Mckltrldge; SUIT
on note. Judgment for plaintiff for $3.50.
Room 3-Pliny w. Bartholomew. Judge.
James Coombs vs.. c., c. G. & ST. L.;
damages. On trial by jury.
Albany Land Company vs.. Harry l..
Hicks; note. Judgment for $3.50.
New Suits Filed.
Judson A. Wann, Receiver, VS.. City of
Indianapolis; suit for injunction. superior
Court, Room 2.
Leander A. Fulmer ct al. VS.. Laura j.
Cloud ct al: suit to forecloSe improve
ments. Superior Court, Room /.
Hiram L. Rose ct al. VS. Charles r. Paul
sen; suit to ~forclose mortgage. Superior
Court. Room l.
Isaac Russell VS.. Lizzie Hart ct al; suit
on account. Superior Court, Room l.
John Coffman VS.. G. III. Block ct al; suit
on lien. Superior Court, Room 1.
Hiram E. Rose ct. al. VS.. Charles F. Paul
sen; suit to foreclose. Superior Court,
Room ].
The Economy Savings and Loan Associa-
ton VS.. John q. eFIancis; suit to foreclose.
Superior Court, Roam. g.
The McCune-Malott Company VS.. Privett
ct al; suit on note. Superior Court,
Room 2.