The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1895-06-15

OF the clerk OF the trial court. the bill will
not be considered. 2 All bills of exceptions
in a criminal prosecution must be made out
and presented TO the Judge at the trial or
within such time thereafter as the Judge
may allow. not exceeding sixty days after
the rendition Of the judgment 3. When the
bill fails to affirmativey show that il con-
tains all the evidence in the cause ii will
not be considered on appeal.
1852. Milburn VS.. Milburn: Clinton c. {.
Reversed. Howard. 6. J.-Where the mort
gage0r expressly agrees TO pay the agreed
upon. and subsequently and before payment
OF the same the mortgageor and mortgage
In choate interest is lost in the property.
but the right TO foreclose the mortgage
l7i76. Carshaddon VS.. City of South Bend.
ST. Joseph G.. g. Petition for rehearins
overruled Hackney, il. Equity will not
insert in unilateral memorandum that
very essential feature embodying the in
tention to "sell to buy" ?. The object OF
requiring a memorandum of a vote to be
taken is TO prevent disputes as 10 what the
parties intended.
1897 Satterwhite VS. The State of Indi-
overruled. Howard. G. il The power TO
add and assess omitted property carries
with IL the power TO investigate and deter
mine as TO whom the property belongs, and
whether in fact il has been omitted from
the tax lists of the owner and the power TO
make such investigation includes the power
TO get information from the owners and
| other witnesses. 2 All rights are saved 10
| the owner until he has received notice 10
attend the board OF equalization and be
I heard. ,. For the purpose of listing prop
erty all records OF public offices, corpora
tions and taxpayers may be Inspected.
! 1900. Western Union Telegraph Company
| VS.. Taggart Marion &. Z. injunction
! granted.
1888 Daugler VS.. indianapolis Union Rail-
way Company. Marion Z. L. Petition Tor re-
| hearing overruled.
l7i47 Sands VS.. l.. d. & s. Railway Com
pany; Marion S. c. Appeal dismissed: =
c. Petition to amend assignment of errors
l7OsS. Hamilton VS.. Love- Vigo S. c. Mo-
| ton to set aside the transfer TO the APP
| pellate Court sustained.
16siS l., ID. & w. Railway Company VS..
| Center Township. Marion &. =. Petition Tor
| rehearing overruled.
Appellate Court.
! 17O1 Criswell VS.. " hitney. DeKalb c. c.
Affirmed. Gavin, il An error In over
ruling demurrer to paragraph In
| verdict is based upon another paragraph
| 2. person receiving the proceeds of an
insurance policy through vodable as
| signment may be compelled to pay it to
| the proper beneficiary.
1913. Peoples National Bank VS.. Winton.
note negotiable under Our our statute entities
the indorser ito notice OF nonpayment in
order to hold him liable, 2 Whenever the ne
| be discounted by another anu assigns 1t TO
him the money is paid by, the assignee
| for the use and benefit of the indorser.
| 1881. Acker VS.. Massman. Jackson c. c.
Reversed Davis ii A party holding a
| lien on property may waive the same and
cause il TO be second 10 another procured
| wholly by his representations. 2. When
one person has induced another to invest
money in property on the representation
! that he will release his claim he VIII be
estopped from setting up his claim to the
| others damages.
| HyO. Walsh VS. Brockway. Benton c. G..
! Petition for rehearing overruled. Davis, j.
| |. There must be some entry, statement
| or memorandum in the record showing that
| the bill of exceptions was filed with the
| clerk. 2. When an examination of the
| record discloses that a rehearing would not
avail the petitioner the petition will be
! 1927 Stone vs. Morgan. Monroe c.. c..
| Reversed. Davis. il. suit against d
| decedents estate must establish a prima
| facie Indebtedness against the estate. 2.
| The record should disclose which paragraph
of the complaint the verdict was based
ices rendered on special contract the value
of the services, should be referred to-;
1879. Sunnyside Coal Company VS.; Reitz.
| overruled. Lotz, when two tortious
| acts are separate and distinct to time
and place the pleader must sever them
in separate counts. but If several injuries
| result from one continuous act they may
all be united in one count. 2 A defendant
pIain9irr waves one of the Elements ' of
| his damages. 3. A person may recover for
damages TO his real estate permanently
1899 Thornburg VS.. Buck. Marshall c. c.
| Affirmed. Lott, i'll. II the statute OF lin
i5ations contain exceptions and i is relied
unless the complaint clearly shows upon it's
face that the plaintiff is barred notwith.
limitations begins to run against a trust
fund only from the time when the trust
Ss by sh ns trTs5es who In
are fully brought 10 the knowledge Of the
cestus que trust g. trust In personal
| determine
judgment or find such facts as leave MOTH
ing for the court to do except to make AK
fact that an affidavit is copied into the
14eO. Klein VS.. Tuhey. Delaware C. c.
Petition for rehearing overruled.
loss Kingan & Co. vs.. Silver. Marion
G. G.. Petition for rehearing overruled.
1923. Island Coal Company VS.. FISHER
| Sullivan G. c. Petition for rehearng over
| ruled
14lS c.. c.. c. G. st. L. Railway Com
pany vs., Martin Fountain c. C. Rehear-
iGis. Harter VS.. Parsons Madison C. C.
| Rehearing granted.
1885, Teesarden VS.. Phillips. Orange C..
! c. Rehearing granted
Superior Court.
Room John L. McMaster. Judge
The Western Paving and supply Company
vs., David 5. Praigg ct Al; suit for lem.
Ora +. Ciary VS.. William !. Clay: di-
vorce Decree granted plaintiff. Judgment
| LOT plalntl1 Tor $lcc allmOny AMI Tor SlCl
! expenses of prosecution.
| Room Lawson VI. Harvey, Judge.
Capital City Dairy VS. Fulton Fish Mar
ket; suit in attachment. Finding for defend
ant.
John r. Hussey ct al. VS. Birdie Lcbr ct
al: suit to foreclose lien. Dismissed at
plaintiffs cost.
Otto Schoen VS.. Terre Hau-e AMI Ind q n
/ apols railroad; damages. Dismissed en1
| costs paid.
Room 3-Pliny w. Bartholomew. Judge
Lee r. Finehout VS.. r. II. Bigger; dam
| ages. Jury returned verdict for defendant.
| Jacob Taylor VS.. Acme Paving Company
| damages. On trial by jury.
Michael Spades VS.. Peter SindIinger; on
! note. Finding for plaintiff for $685..
New Suits Filed.
Sarah Yaneer We. Jacob Yanger ct al
suit for support. Superior Court, Room >. :
Mary a. Wolfe VS.. John II. Wolfe; suit
for divorce. Superior Court, Room l.
| Mary Meller VS.. Dudley Nj. Culver ct al
suit to foreclose mortgage. Superior Court
Room l.
Mary A. Morgan VS.. Don Carlos Morgan
| ct al; suit for support Superior Court
| Room ).
FRENCH CONGRATULATES HARLEY.