The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1895-07-19
SUPREME COURT OPINIONS.
The Right Of Railroad Companies in Re-
moving Dangerous Stones.
DECISION IN FAVOR OF THE n. & W.
Laws Governing Contract Made In This
State Between "a Foreign Corporation.
stuart W. pcnnis-P. >. Otcy
and Wife w.. stuart.

WYTHEVILI.r VA, July Especial.
The following opinions were handed down
In the Supreme. Court OF Appeals to-day
Norfolk and Western Railroad Com
pany against DcBoard, administrator.
Opinion 10y Judge Cardwch Writ OF
error to a judgment OF Smyth county.
Reversed.
DcBoard occupied a shop on a sman
lot OF land adjacent to the railroad COM
panys right OF way. and. with others,
uSed path Tor number OF ScdiS
across this lot OF land, and that run
along the edge OF the companys en-
banAmcni. or cut, snort uls'dhV,sr ~ -
private crossing or railroad TRACK IN,
hands repairing track AT TINS Poiht'
found "A stone IN the cmbankmcnt, Whlchs
Al was alleged, was loose. ana iapie |"
ron down on the track. ana wreck liai's'
and they removed H. Deboaan' "a a ass lnw
along his path. by reason Of The re
moval OF the stone. fell through, uls
lance OF seven feet. upon the railroad .sa
below whereby he received INJURIES i''''
which he died some weeks after. 60,
srhe Court held that II was not only me
righf hut the duty OF the railroad com
many 10 remove this stone 'iidt w q
could be no carclessness or hesison Tor
the part of the railroad company, .oi
which they could be held liable IN uain,
ages in this action, without III en-
proof to show that the agents y. 80
,,ioVes az the company knew al tnc 1in..ss
If removal Of this stone that inc ias ,n
was left !n n dangerous cohul'iol,,, 80
failed 20 repair ", or guard aS"i ne, I've
sons using the path, walh'hh ~ IL
tran ar pitfall thus made, ana ih"t ~
c,,idanc. In this case rs not suinclch' ~
snow TINT company's employees kh.m
of the dangerous condition III III -
path in question was lei'. am mun'poard's
fore. the verdict ia favor OF D'n . ,s,dr
adminis,rat0r should have been set "S'U'
IS TO CONTACTS.
Stuart vs. Pennis opinion by Judge
RIelv. From the Circuit Court or huSS,n
county. Reversed. THIS was sun ~
compel the specific performance 'l " ~. III.
tract I'm writing for the SAFE 'i .he
SINNER trees. which the Vendcc had lhr
right under the contract, 10 sever anu
remove within period OF three y'ais.
The Court held. First lhai IL ".' -,
contract for the sale Of an l.teItst ~
iand which a Court of Equity wouid
specifically enforce. 80. ..~. ~, IN no
considered contract ioi tie 81, 80 90 O.,
interest in land but Of chatteis' ft' Wv"
inr to the peculiar features OF the cae
me remedy at law for the preach on
The contract was wholly lhadepnd''' "u'
that II presented proper '"'' ~
"1 pster ! 0tev ana wife vs. stuart Opin-
ION bv Judge buchanan. From tneell
cult court OF Wythe county. Alnirr'' ~
parry III a. n tract of land can
moi as "A general rule. file blli IN
~our, Of equity to remove cloud from
i,s title. unless he is IN possession o'
''' Vational Mutual BuDding and Loan As
sociat'on vs.. AshwOrth. opinion ny Juuhc
buchanan From the Circuit ,ouIt 80
Washington county. NeyerSeo' md" ~
who comes into court OF r9".ts ~
enioin "A sale upon the grouhd tiiat 81
foreign corporation has not comrheu WIZ
the laws OF the state author ~ tiicc" On
do business IN the state must a"'r' VI"
what that failure CONSISTS. ... ,,.,,.oo,
A contract made I'm this stat" nelWcth
a foreign corporation ana a ciii@,m IN az
State. TO be performed IN ihe uoin, ,i' ~,
No foreign corporation. rs foNtIhcp ~
he iaws of the foreign state as 10 us
nature Interpretation. validity. ana Ell
feet ,-.. ,v,ui,m
Uarr,snn. From the Circuit court ol
Russell county. Affirmed -, &C.,
II is held that under the Sode Oh iS'S.
chaptcr M. sections and ). WnehsV,i
the deed OF a married woman Is uuly
ncknovledged and delivered - lhe Pivp'I
Office TO be recorded, then II Is IN INV
treated as recorded. so iar as tn' ma
ricl woman Is concerned. ANY hiial"N'
az the clerk in transcrihnS the drcn
,,pon the books Of his Office canu'l op.-
rate TO renvcst the married woman Win
thc title TO that which she nae uul!
;,.rtcd with according 10 the terms pre-
scr!bci by the statute. ,...
COX Trustee. against Price. Trustee.
pplnion 10y Judge Harrison. FROM uhe
CORPORATION Court Of the city OF brlstoi
Affirmed. This ease involves questions ol
chancery pleallngs.
oTHFE cAsFs
pettviohn against Burson. opinion 10y
Judrr kcrh rrcsidclt. Affirmed. from
the Corporation Court of the city oil
BRISTOL. -.
Gptnfon hy judge Keith. president. Re
verscd From the Circuit Court Of Nythe
county.
ranv against Anderson. Writ or error
ana si,pt rscdcas awarded @ the ludS-
men Of the Circuit court of Boteiouri
county. Bond I'm the penalty of $500.
Trustees Emory and Henry College
and others against Shoemaker Ioicse,
Appeal and superscdeaS AWARDED 10
decree OF the Circuit Court OF Scott coun-
iv Bond IN the penalty of 500
Ferguson a Co against Davidson ana
others. Appeal and supesedcas AWARDED
20 the decree of the Circuit Court OF
Southampton county. Bond in the pen
Garland against Garland. Appeal and
supersedeas awarded 20 the decree OF
me Circuit Court OF bynchburs. No
bond is required as appeal Is necessary
20 protect the estate Of the decedent.
Brown against Brown. Appeal refused
TO decree of the Corporation Cour.
of the city Of Danvilie.
81 Temple against Wright Appeal and
supersedeas awarded 10 the decree OF The
Circuit Court OF Brunswick county. No
bond required the APPELLANT being per
sonal representatives
Shipman against Fletcher From the
Circuit Court OF the city Of Alexandria.
Petition for rehearing refused.
t ---
THE BEDFORD SUMMER sCHOOL.