The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1895-02-27
THE COURT RECORD.
Supreme Court.


E222. Deal VS.. The State Allen C. G.
Affirmed McCabe, C. il This court will
NOT reverse cause on the mere weight of
eViueHce. Inc general rule is that If there
is evidence from which the jury might rea-
sonably find or infer fact and they find ac-
verdict because there is other evidence in
CONNECT with that on which the finding is
paseo dnress the verdict Is clearly against the
avail himself Of the doctrine of self-defense
must mus be without fault. and where both par
the taking of life without retreating g. Re-
cltals in. motion for new trial must be
hv hil 20 20 es true by the record proper or
for a new trial. 4. Questions upon refusal
to to admit ADMIT evidence from a witness only
some pertinent question, and upon objection
made stating to the court as it may direct
would detail in answer thereto
1861 Julian vs. The State. Marion c. c.
Affirmed. Monks, il The Attorney-gen-
eral, even with the appreciation of the State
officers has no authority to contract with
an attorney for his services in prosecuting
real estate. 2. The Governor nor any other
officer has any right to employ person to
render services in laboring with and en-
tightening members and committees of the
Legislature to prevent the enactment of GER
tain laws.
1882 Goodman VS.. The State. Madison c.
c. Affirmed. Howard, il. 1t is not error
to prosecute jointly under different courts
of the Indictment both those who stole the
property and he who received it, knowing it
to have been stolen. :, The jury may infer
the knowledge that goods were stolen from
the acts of the defendant
Appellate Court.
1867. Dalrymple VS.. Woods Henry c. c.
Reversed. Davis, J.-Where a person pur-
chases judgment for valuable considera-
ton the Judgment may he pleaded as a set
off to a note between the assignee and
payer.
Reversed. Ross, c. il. Where the statute
of limitations from defense which may be
less the facts alleged in the complaint show
affirmatively that none of the exceptions
exist which withhold the operation of the
statute. e. Errors assigned In appeal and
not discussed are considered waived. 3. No
Acknowledgement or promise shall be evil
dence of a new or continuing contract
whereby to take the cause out of the statute
of limitations unless the same be contained
in some Writing signed by by, the ,d party to De
admissible to prove such acknowledgement
promise.
Reversed. Gavin. 1.-The principal cannot,
when advised as to all the facts. elect to ap-
prove in part and reject in part.
Superior Co1rt.
Room John L. McMaster. Judge.
John Moore Beauregard D Whilden;
street Improvement. Under amusement.
Samuel G. Hannah vs. Martin M. Con-
norroe; revive judgment. Finding for de-
Benjamin G. Hamilton ct al. VS.. Eliza
beth Burnett ct al; mechanics lien. On
trial by court
Room 2-Lawson NJ Harvev Judge.
Alexander r. Orr VS.. d. A. Williams;
count. Dismissed and costs paid.
Allen NJ. Robbins VS.. Edward w. Rob
bins; divorce. Decree granted plaintiff.
s. r. Scherrer VS.. Mansfield & Allen:
account. Judgment vs. Defendant Tor $50
and costs.
Big -Four Building Association VS.. j. r.
McCurty; foreclosure. Dismissed and costs
paid.
Elizabeth c. Linder VS.. William Under:
divorce, and alimony., Decree of divorce
granted plaintiff. Judgment VS.. defendant
for $4,000 and costs.
Room 3-Pliny w. Bartholomew, Judge
Algernon Patterson VS.. Thomas Bow
man; quiet title Finding for plaintiff
Rollins Raymond VS.. Ada Raymond; d.
yorce. On trial by court.
Circuit Court.
Edgar A Brown. Judge.
James Wildman, trustee, VS.. Willis Pruett
Of plaintiff for SIR.
Edwin P. Ferris VS.. George Owens. Dis
missed by plaintiff without prejudice;
EaMin oy Perris w'ho jacob Weftz
EdWin p. Y Ferris Pn vs.. James James, n Bowman
Dismissed by plaintiff without prejudice.
Newton Todd VS.. the Indianapolis Cabinet
petition of Edward S. Hawkins, receiver
indianapolis National Bank.
Joel T. Elliott, John Ward Henry .Hage-
west were appointed by the court, city
commissioners for the town of West In
New Suits Filed.
Charles Schwert ct al VS.. Udord Cox;
suit on improvement lien Superior Court.
Room 3.
Rock Pants Company; suit in attachment.
Superior Court. Room l.
Peter Delany VS.. Cornelius B. Holloway;
suit in replevin. Superior Court Room 3.