St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1895-01-18
DECISIONS BY BUCK.
Lower Courts Are Affirmed in
Seven Cases Out Of
Nine,
AND TWO ARE REVERSALS.
The Hare-Pennington Deci-
sion Does Not Appear
in the Number,
THOUGH NEEDED BADLY.
Nothing Of a Sensational
Character in the List
a. Handed Down.
THOUGH NEEDED BADLY.

The supreme court handed down nine
decisions yesterday, all written by JUS
tice Buck. In seven cases the decisions
and orders of the lower courts are af-
frmed, and the remaining two are re-
versals. The titles and syllabi of the
cases follow: ~
Order Is Reversed.
May EngeI, appellant. VS.. Scott &
Hollister Lumber Company, defendants
respondents; Herman, Beckiinger &
Herman, intervenorS, respondents.
Syllabus-When the language of a
written contract is so equiyocal or am
biguouS as to be open TO either of two
interpretations, parol evidence of the
subsequent conduct of the parties show
ing the construction put upon it by
them, is admissible.
Held, that under the evidence in this
case the question of whether the con-
duct of the parties was that delivery OF
the legs so as to pass title was to be
made on the st. Louis river, within one
half mile of Fond du Lac station. or at
the mill of the vendees at New Duluth,
and, if the former, whether such deliy-
cry had been in fact made, should have
been submitted to the jury.
A mere naked bailee cannot recover
against third person for the CONVEX
sion of the bailee property when the
bailor or owner has interviewed and as
serted his rights TO the property. But O
bailee entitled to the possession of the
goods for a specific time and purpose
may, Notwithstanding such interven-
ton on the part of the general owner,
recover to the extent of the value of his
special interest III the property. Order
reversed. BUCK, j.
Not Facts Enough.
David ToZer, appellant, VS.. j. G. o.
German, as receiver of Seymour, Sabin
Il Co.. j. co. German and j. n. Searle,
respondents. Syllabus-Held that the
part of the answer demurred to did not
state facts sufficient TO estop plaintiff
from maintaining this action, for the
reason that it is not alleged that, when
he signed the bond referred to, he
PENDANTS to violate the order of the
court or that the bond was intended to
be used for any such illegal purpose.
Hence the doctrine Of pari delicto does
not apply. Order reversed.
BUCK, J.
Canty, j., concurs In the result.
g. Title Is Limited.
Giles Gilbert, appellant, VS.. Mary F.
Emerson, George c. Howe, ct al, re-
spondents. Syllabus-W Where person
executes plat Of submerged land, eX-
tending it distance of several blocks.
streets and alleys, beyond the shore line
into the water, but not to the point of
navigability, and then conveys one of
the blocks of this submerged land. in
the rear of which and around the plat
ted lines of an alley twelve feet wide
between the block so conveyed and the
outermost line Of the alley. and beyond
which, In the direction of the line of
navigable water, there is an unplatted
space of submerged land;
Held, that no title or apDurtenant
right to the unplatted space passed to
the grantee of such block, and that his
title was limited to the center of the
alley. Judgment affirmed.
BUCK, J.
No Bar to Action.
Charles D. Wright, assignee of the
Page Flour Mills, insolvent, respondent.
VS.. George TileSton, appellant. Syl-
labus - Complaint construed as stat
ing cause Of action against lessee for
damages resulting from negligence In
the care Of the demised premises and
not for the breach of the covenant "to
surrender the premises at the eXpira-
ton of the term In as good condition
and repair as when he took them, rea-
sonable wear and tear and damages by
the elements alone excepted"
Held that former judgment in an ac-
ton against the lessee for breach of