The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1895-03-20
THE COURT
Supreme Cnurt.

1870. State ex rel. Chisholm VS.. Gold,
IA person taking a pauper from the
county asylum and agreeing that he would
care for her and not charge the county with
her maintenance cannot afterward sue for
his services in maintaining her.
1895. Lawrence vs.. Van Buskirk. Miami
c. G. Affirmed. Monks, il. Where the
giving of several instructions to the jury is,
assigned as one error in an appeal, and any
one of them is free from objection, the
court will not disturb the Judgment. 2. This
court will not reverse a cause on the weight
ct evidence when It finds there is evidence
to sustain the verdict.
1907. Abbitt, administra tor, VS.. L. e. &
w. Railway Company. Marion S. G. Spe-
cial term affirmed. General term reversed.
Howart. IL. Where two or more persons
are about to enter upon a railroad track it
is the duty of each to look and listen for APP
preaching cars, but it is not generally true
that If one of such persons neglect to do his
duty, to. so look and listen, his negligence
can be imputed to the others. 2. If an in
jury to an employe is part due to the negli-
gence of the employer he cannot escape LA
bility for his own wrong. no matter what
may, have been the negligence of the CO
employee, nor can one company escape liza
bility for its own wrong by charging negii-
gence against the employees of another COM
Dany.
1874. Blough VS.. Parry. Elkhart c.. C.
Reversed. McCabe, c: il. 1t is an error
to allow a question to be answered on cross
examination to negative something that was
not brought out on examination in chief.
2. Only such statements made out of court
contrary to the testimony of the witness
in court, when such testimony relates to a
material matter IN issue, can be 1mDe2cned.
3. The right of a party to impeach his own
witness arises when the witness ~testifies to
some matter prejudicial to the party calling
him. 4. 1t is error to give the jury instruc-
lions not applicable to the case as proven
by the evidence. 5. Instructions to the jury
which declare a person is responsible for all
acts are erroneous. 6. Instruction should be
given in clear and concise language, and all
technical words so explained that the jurors
may not become confused.
17eS3. fairfield VS.. Cummings. recorder.
Huntington G. c.. Withdra wal of petition
for rehearing accepted.
Appellate Court.
1917. Farrell VS.. Lumber Company. Benton
c.. C. Reversed. Gavin, IA complaint to
the materials were furnished for the
building. 2. A complaint under which the
plaintiff Is entitled to some relief is suffi-
cient to withstand a demurrer.
1914. Bedford Stone Company VS.. O'Brien.
Lawrence c.. c. Reversed. Reinhard, j.
/. Actionable negligence is the breach of
some duty owing to the plaintiff by the de-
was aai injured. 3 4 person must exercise their
faculties in such a manner as to avoid
danger, and failing to do so is contributory
negligence. 3. Ordinary care should be that
Greet and cautious individual would or ought
to use IL the whole risk and loss were to be
his own exclusively.
ton for rehearing overruled. Ross, c.. j.
/. A justice. of the peace having no jurisdic-
ton in a case, an appeal can confer none
on the Circuit Court. 2. Where the justice
had jurisdiction of Doth the subject matter
and the parties, the Superior Court took
jurisdiction by the appeal.
Superior Coart.
Room John l.. McMaster. Judge.
William R. Mercer VS.. the Consolidated
Coal and Lime Company; contract. On trial
by court.
Room 2-Vinson Carter, Judge Pro TEN.
c.. II. Mccarthy VS.. l.. A. Kinsey; dam
ages for assault and battery. Jury returned
verdict for the defendant.
H. H. Wyatt VS.. City of Indianapolis and
Western Paving Company; damages. Dis
missed and costs paid.
Home Brewing Company VS.. Herman
Ackelow; account. Judgment by agreement
for $780,. 80 and costs VS.. defendant.
Robert Kellar vs. Frederick Eggert. Dis
missed and costs paid.
j. w. Stout VS.. NJ. Harrowitz; malicious
prosecution. On trial by jury.
Room 3-Pliny w. Bartholomew. Judge.
indianapolis Abattoir Company VS.. Georgia
Pouder, account. Dismissed and costs
paid.
closure. Dismissed and costs paid.
Zeph H~ollingsworth: foreclosure. Julg-
ment for 81, 5lS.09. Sale ordered.
Isaac Springer VS.. Ruth NJ. Springer; d.
vorce. Decree granted plaintiff.
New Suits Filed.
Emma C. Smith VS.. George j. Smith: suit
for divorce. Superior Court, Room 3.
William j. Hayes eft al. vs.. Herman Lieber
ct al: suit to f0recIose. Street lien. Super
Tor Court. Room 2.
Dun's indianapolis ONCE Enlarged.