The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1896-11-06
THE COURT RECORD.
Court.

11115. Ashcraft VS.. Knoblock. St. Joseph
c. {. Affirmed. Hackney. il. The pay
all. or such portion of the damages as will
discharge him who makes the payment,
VIII work a discharge from liability of all
When the pleading shows that the issues
joined make the defendants joint defend
ants a Judgment thereon Will be joint; ,;
Ihere can be but one satisfaction OIL Il
Judgment rendered against joint tort fea-
sors.
Olcott. Marion S. G.. Dismissed. Monks,
6. J:-Assignment of errors shall contain
the full names of all the parties.
1892: watson VS.. Lecklider. Marion s.
{. Affirmed. Jordan, il In an action
to quiet title all matters of defense in
Guiding the statute or limitations are adj
missible under the general denial. 2. This
court cannot presume that the issues in a
former suit we're the same as in a suit in
volving the title 10 the same real estate in
i7ss5. wade VS.. Mast. EIkhart c. c.
Affirmed. Howard. i'll. A prior judg-
ment having been opened up in order that
prove good, and that defense being sus-
tanned the prior Judgment is abrogated. 2.
A meritorious defense must be shown by a
party who seeks to set aside a default and
the defense must affect the merits Of the
by a collateral attack.
1906. Crist vs.. Schank. Perry c. c.
1s0i5. Davis vs.. Union Trust Company.
Marion c. c.. Certiorari ordered.
1909. Hardware Company VS.. Thomas.
Fayette c. g. Leave granted to substitute.
Appellate Court.
1880. c.. G. Z. r. r. Co. VS.. Wagner.
Huntington c. G. Reversed. Gavin, il.
A servant assumes all the risks ordinarily
incident to the work i'm which he is en-
gagged, except what hazards are occasioned
by the masters own negligent breach of
duty unknown to the servant. 2. If a de-
feet is open and obvious so that by the eX-
ercise of reasonable care 1t could have been
known the law presumes that 1t was
known.
Delaware c. c. Affirmed. Reinhard, il.
Where an action is instituted under Sec
tons 53l2-53ls, r. S. 1894. against a railroad
company for the killing OF a domestic an
imal the complaint may show by implica-
ton that the animal was killed in the
county wherein the suit is brought. 2 A
Judgment will not be reversed on account
of the improper introduction of evidence
when it appears that there is an abundance
of evidence to the same effect already In
the record and that there was no material
harm done by such evidence
2074. Howk VS.. Branson.- montgomery Z.
c. Affirmed. Davis. G.. il. This court
official reporter, by refreshing her memory
from her notes. may testify as TO what a
witnesses evidence was on a former trial.
3. The extent of cro~ss-examination Is
within the sound discretion OF the court.
and without a manifest abuse the Judg-
ment of the court will not be reversed.
superior SOurt.
Room John l.. McMaster, Judge.
Lambart Kuenholzins VS.. Charles Roller.
Dismissed and costs paid.
Teeter Molding Machine Company VS..
Henry C. Snnither; contract. Dismissed and
costs paid.
Daniel H. Thurston VS.. c., g., &. Il st. L..
Ry. Co.; damages. Finding and judgment
for PLAINTIFF for s.. 600 and costs.
Room 3-Vinson Carter, Judge.
Elizabeth d. Smith VS.. Winfield 5. Smith;
habeas corpus. Writ granted.
Criminal Court.
Frank FRA Judge.
State VS.. John Fowler; petty larceny.
Sent to Reform School.
State VS. Albert Stevens; assault and bat
terry, with intent to commit rape. John 3.
Duncan appointed special judge to try the
case.
New Suits Filed.
Elizabeth D.. Smith VS.. Winfield s. Smith
habeas corpus. Superior Court, Room 8.
Alock NJ. Caulkins VS.. John &. Pare, ct
al. to set aside chattle mortgage. Superior
Court, Room l..
Ida NJ. Kenner VS.. Charles A. kenner; d.
vorce. Superior Court, Room /.
Mills & Small VS.. Lowe Carey; on note.
Superior Court, Room 2.
Mills & Small VS.. Charles n. kellogg; on
note. Superior Court, Room 3.
James A. ISgr'gg vs.. Edgar b. Spra5uei
on mechanics len. Superior Court, Room 3