The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1895-03-15
THE COURT RECORD.
Supreme Court.

1907. City of New. Albany vs.. The Iron
dan. i'll. All matters in dispute must be
properly inserted in. the bill of exceptions
a master IS merely to re report the evidence
to the court, his report must be made a
part Of the record ON appeal by bill of
clearly appears that evidence which was
excluded was dependent for it's pertinency
introduced upon the trial and as none of
this is contained in the record, it is not
made to affirmatively appear that there was
claim and exercise the right or power to
builder completed his contract in good
faith the city will not be heard to plead
the defense of ultra wires.
Dissenting opinion. McCabe c. J.-If the
original long hand manuscript OF the evil
bodied in the bill of exceptions when it
is signed by the Judge, but is ordered to
be inserted by a direction to the clerk to,
or set into the bill, of exceptions by the
clerk in making up the transcript. it is
14 r0po of = the Revised Statutes 1881. &c.
1864. Hatfield VS.. Cummings, Receiver.
Huntington c.. G. Reversed. Howard j.
In an answer to a complaint of a receiver
of corporation to collect debts due said
corporation, the failure to allege the appli-
cation for an appointment Of a receiver
within the statutory limits for such ap-
pointment is bad on demurrer
ca lzs motion 10 sre out
cross errors sustained.
1888. Harter vs.; Parsons. Madison c. c.
Transferred to Appellate Court.
Appellate Court.
14S1 Neither VS.. Todd. Fountain c. c.
Affirmed. Lott, i'll. Payment of the in
terest on a negotiable. note. is ratification
of the debt and an acknowledgment to pay
the same. z. A paymentsInade by one joint
debtor or joint and several debtor does not
limitations as to the, other debtor who had
no knowledge OF the payment
Ai lSsO T'ty OF R For. "a Rnes vs. purre1
is error for court to direct the jury to
retire and fill a blank, in special verdict.
suffering. q 1t is the duty of the Jllsy
when they return a special verdict to find
and it is the duty OF the court to determine
what facts are meterial.
1883. Eddinghsld vs. State ex rel. Wa
alleged error of instructions can only be
maintained by showing wherein, they are
granted on. account Of newly discovered
evidence where such evidence could have
pcant shows due diligence in i trying to a ab
tain it; and if II Is cumulative it will be
refused.
Superior Coart.
Room John IL McAraster, Judge
Eclipse Stove Company vs. Isaac +.
Franklin: account.e Judgment for plaintiff
Henry Coburn VS. willis Privett ct al:
raechanics lien. Judgment for plaintiff for
$65.44. es-@
William Rehling VS.. Jennie B. Weber;
sprinkling lien. Dismissed and costs paid.
Room Lawson NJ Harvev. Judge.
Malinda X Justice VS.. Lucy F. yerger ct
al; mortgage. Judgment against defendants
for Sl27.S4 and costs. Foreclosure and sale
ordered.
Charles MartindaIe ct al, vs. D. ID. Dor
rell eft al; foreclosure. Finding and Judgment
against defendants in favor of Martindale
for $336.65, and in favor OF United States
Savings and Investment Company for
Mary Sloan vs.. William Segmund; suit on
note. Jury returned verdict for plaintiff
Damages assessed at S1199o.
Room 3-Pliny W. Bartholomew Judge.
Sophia Crawford VS.. Citizens Street-rail-
road Company; damages. On trial by jury.
Circuit Court.
Edgar A. Brown, Judge
Indiana Bond Company VS.. Thomas E.
William B. Earthman VS. Enoch H Moore
ct al; replevin Dismissed by plaintiff.
Claim of Susan klingensmith VS.. estate of
John Klingensmith. Dismissed and costs
paid.
Jerome W. schmeltz VS.. Augusta H Tim
norman; replevin. Dismissed and costs paid.
New Suits Filed.
J. w. Haughey VS.. Frank Kenerek ct al:
suit on note Superior Court, Room 8.
suit for divorces. Superior Court, Room g.
Southern Pine Lumber Company VS.. Enoch
H. Moore; suit on account.
Arthur Lee VS.. Sarah A. KetciIam: suit
on Improvement bond. Superior Court,
Alice A. Condit VS.. Elijah d. Rutledge;
suit on promissory note Superior Court,
L..