The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1895-05-29

to comply with some material provision Of
the statute which operated TO the prejudice
question subject to taxation had been duly
listed and returned therefor.
Il6l9. Myers vs.. City OF. yeffersonville
express declination of the appellant TO file
a brief is a waiver of the error he has as
signed for appeal.
li4lS. Ireager VS.. Jackson Mining Com
pany. Clay c. c. Affirmed. McCabe. J.
declarations of an agent made while not
engaged In transacting the principals bust
Ncss are not admissible against the prln-
clpal 2 A judgment will not be reversed
upon the instructions of the lower court
unless there is some showing that all the
instructions are in the record.
I7407. Berkeley VS.. The City of Elkhart.
EIknart {. c. Transferred 10 the Appellate
Court. Hackney, il. The validity of a
case tails within the jurisdiction Of the
appellate Court. 2. All matters or defense
except the statute of limitations set of and
matters in abatement may be given in evil
9ence without plea. 3. In the Circuit Court,
in cases originating before a mayor. the
rules or pleading and practice OF the
MAYORS court are observed on appeal
n3Sl. Belshaw VS.. Chitvood. Lake c. e.
Affirmed. Hackney. 1.-THE fact that a
teStator had expressed the intention. TO re-
YOKE a will is insufficient 10 constitute d
1881. National State Bank vs.. vigo
county Bank. Vigo C. c. Reversed.
- tnQtE SOULFUL - -
1894. the directors of a corporation have
full authority to act for the corporation
In all matters relating TO the corporate
business. 2. The board of directors have
the power 10 invest the president with au-
thority to act as the chief executive officer
or the company, which may be done by
resolution or by acquiesence in the course
or dealing and manner of transacting the
business of the corporation, and when a
acting under authority, il is binding upon
the corporation. but if there was no such
authority the contract will be binding up
on the corporation until the same is shown
TO be unauthorized.
a,SeS: Peterson VS. sohl. Porter TT e. Us
makes an agreement for the purchase of
lands, enters and makes valuable improve
ments upon and pays for the same; when
boundary lines. and consents that the
grantee makes the improvements and build
to the lines so fixed. those lines SO fixed
and acted upon will be maintained. 2. Wis
ible monuments erected upon land by the
grantor must stand against those subse-
isaS.S W NeWco 9H nim Vs. on 1Pn aPsra City.
Marion c.. c. Affirmed. Jordan. il. When
a statute grants a right or imposes a duty
ticular power necessary for the exercise of
the one or the performance or
the other 2 When the statute gives or
provides the means for the exercise OF the
power those means and no other must be
employed. g. The city has the right to
~
lie service may be ascertained.
174os. Mufiey, VS.. Turner. Porter c.. c:
or matters upon which the PLAINTIFF cease
proceeds determine what is in issue unless
1t appears from an examination of all OF the
pleadings that other matters are brought
forward and thus become necessarily in
volved and determined in the suit.
l699S. Mutual Benefit Society VS.. Mckay.
Elkhart c. G. Petition for rehearing over
ruled. Hackney, 1.-THE finding that there
was a pool" from which to pay claims
80 EA.-1 400 - -..a - 60 1sa0An rra n
1876. L., y. A. g. c. Railway Company
and Tr.:, St; l. & !. iIa C. C. Railway f G9mgsan ny
TO the former appellant, reversed as to the
latter. Monks, J.-It Is the duty of a railway
company to keep in safe condition all parts
of its platform with the approaches thereto
so as TO furnish TO the public safe 1ngreSS
and to prevent injury 10 passengers who
able lengt of. time before the arrival and
departure Of trains in the night time, TO
p pa sarx c Hgnt ts tMhaaar tsR{ lo so as a,d make
them comfortable and safe for the use of
passengers wishing to take passage upon
il must respond in damages to a passenger
who, without fault on his part. is injured
by the negligent failure to perform such
1921. Currier VS.. Elliott. Marion S. c.
Petition for rehearing overruled.
Appellate Court.
1114. Make VS.. Daviess County Agricultural
Association. R RaSydieess e horse Z; A mr. 1as Ke de-
| clared .'off'' or postponed until another day,
| and the judge SO acted in good faith, a per-
son who knew of such intention, but
| listened to the clamor of by-standers, and,
with others, ran the race contrary to the
expressed intention of the associaslqn, can an
| race was afterward run and he refused to
enter and compete for the honors.
| Petition for rehearing overruled. Gavin, j.
Il. Money advanced to pay off a Judgment
is sufficient consideration for the assign
| ment of the judgment.
1921. Leak VS.. Galloway. Warren c. G.
Affirmed. Ross, c. w there Is evil
| dence to sustain the trial courts finding it
will not be disturbed.
1916. p, c., c. d st. L. Railway Company
VS.. Ives. Grant c. C. Affirmed. Gavin, j.
/. In order TO control a general verdict an
cilable with it. 2. II the instructions are
wrong, but the verdict is according TO the
1nnot be said that the verdict is contrary
to the law. 8. The railroad company must
furnish such persons who are rlghtfully
upon it's premises unloading freight such
| protection as will keep them from being in
| jured by moving trains.
1890. Dunphy VS.. Goodlander. Wabash {.
c.. Affirmed. Ross, G. il. The court may
look to the construction put upon a con-
tract by the parties to 1T when the Ian
guage used is ambiguous or uncertain. z.
Where a contract for the use of lands pro-
vides that the lease NAV terminate by dis
agreement it takes the contract away from
the contract from year 10 year..
1929. Leobetta VS.. Embree. Grant {. Z.
Reversed. Gavin, il. When an owner
| pursues a wrongful taker of his property
by suit for damages and RECEIVERS judgment
and obtains satisfaction of such Judgment
| then he can no longer assert a claim
to the property. 2. A wrongdoer who holds
the property Of another without right can
| not claim title thereto until he has actually
satisfied the owner. 3. An unsatisied
judgmen in replevin is no bar to another
suit in repleviI, for the same property
against another defendant.
1641. Bedford Belt Railway Company VS..
Mcdonald. Lawrence G.. G. Reversed.
Davis. IA subordinate officer or agent
of a corporation has no authority to en-
ploy surgical attendance for a servant in
jured in the performance of duty or for
| a person injured by its train except on an
urgent exigency and in such cases the
liability arises with the emergency and
with It expires.