The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1896-02-21

1s5ss. Majors vs.. Craig. Morgan G. G.
Af1rmed Monks. il The decision 81 q
law Of the case. > when q person se6E1
to set aside a Judgment ne must aver IN 116
complaint and prove tl THAI he could nee
Judgment by the exercise OF reasonob1e a.
isence: 90 That he was reasonably d.lf-
s se5 That IN aii hsysns d,s sse frspd ts or f T'sS;< g
mistake. he has proceeded with reasonabio
d.ligence to obtain relief by iegal proceeSS
1857. wilson vs.. TaIley. Jackson c. c.
Petition for rehearing overruled. Howard.
ditch it fa Is aG not error 1a : % oes give the he foile~ sa''s
instruction 20 the jury: III you f1nd any
damages in Wilson's favor upon the meas
clude all damages present and prospective.
deducting, however. any value of benefits
by By G the es es aa% ssn1ssa; Sfs sse d it S''"ss'
1888. k.efer vs.. klinsick. Cas- c. c.
Petition for rehearing overruled.
1860. Alexander VS.. johnson. Washingtoo
c. &. Petition for rehearing overruied.
Appellate Court.
1928. Voss vs.. Palace Car Company. Ma
rion S. c. Reversed. Reinhard. J.-Whero
the road OF another company by the owner
OF the road expressly delivers her baggage
to the porter of the car. who takes charge
passengers effects from the car to the wait
ing room OF the station. the sleeping car
company Will be liable for the negligence o.
AAC u III AlllL y a&Af| - 49, E84@@
cape belonging 10 said passenger. said cape
having, been lost or stolen through such
negligence OF the porter.
1876. Lewis vs.. Buskirk. Montgomery {.
c. Reversed. Lotz. ia An incompeten<
witness is one who does not answer the re-
Quirements of law. 2 When a claim - nied
the deceased may testify TO the validity OF
the claim when she Is interested m protect-
that OF the claimant. Nor is IL necessary TO
show what such witness Will testify 20
before she may be psrmitted uun~
vs.. Cohen. Carroll C.. c. Affirmed. Davis.
i'll. The doctrine OF contributory neglf-
nature SsrSr of assault and battery. 2. Among
the elements making up the damage for
| having been w~rongfuly elected from z train
are pain, suffering, loss Of time ana his
feeling Of shame and humiliation occasioned
by the wrongful conduct OF the company
through its conductor OF the train. 3. Where
a passenger did not produce his train check
and was elected from the train. IL Is not
error TO sustain an objection 10 the foltow-
ing question Don't you know that IL you
had produced that ticket 1t would have
stopped all trouble between your because
the question sought TO elicit the opinion OF
the plaintiff at the trial as to what the ef-
feet would have been on the occasion when
he was expelled II he had then produced the
c 'iaeaD citizens' street-railway Company w.
Albright. Hancock c. G. Petition for re-
hearing overruled. Gavin. G. J-When the
bin of exceptions Is not fled within the
time dllONt u IT ~ AUX ~ akk<o&
in the bill itself that 1t was presented within
the time.
Room limo. l.. McMaster. Judge.
Rachel Goodwin vs.. Charles Dawson: 5ru
ct al; foreclosure. Judgment for plaintiff
Abel A. putnam VS.. George F. Kreitleins
on account. Judgment for plaintin for So
Frederick Mueller VS.. John F. Murphy. Fl
al: title. Judgment for plaintin quiettne
John w. Murphy VS.. Frank H johnson.
Judgment for plaintiff for $625.91.
Aetna Saving and Loan Association Va
Charles j. Dayhof ct al: foreclosure. Judgs
ment for plaintiff for s7ss.15.
Alfred r. F. Ciscnman VS.. John c. Pier
son ct AL. lien. Judgment for plaintih for
ToConcordia Fire Insurance Company VI
Lucinda r. Newson Ell al; foreclosure. On
Gran ID. Shower ct al. VS.. Dennis Bryan
| ct al; on bond. Judgment for plaintin for
$50.
| Room 2-Upton ]. Hammond. Judge pro tenn
Hey II. Becker VS.. Frank K. Helwigs
damages. On trial by jury
Room 3-Pliny w. Bartholomew. Judge.
Sarah c. Cumpack VS. Luther H. Balen-
| ger: damages. on trial by court: finding
for ~plaintiff against defendant for 5000.
without relief. and costs.
John Mccormick VS.. metropolitan Lite
Insurance Company; insurance policy. On
trial by court.
Henry coburn VS.. Premier Steel Com
pany; mechanics lien. Finding for PLAINTIFF
for $222.63.
New Suits Filed.
James ". Conway VS.. Louisville, New
Albany & Chicago Railroad ct al; dam
ages. Superior Court. Room l.
Claude T.. Giesen ct al. VS. Clarence j..
Forsythe ct al; suit on note. Superior
Court. Room 3.
Anna May Mays VS.. William B. Nays
divorce. Superior Court, Room 2
The Mechanics Mutual Savings and Loan
ct al; mortgage. Superior Court. Room g.
Stella O. Miller VS.. Charles W.. Miller
divorce. Superior Court. Room 3.
Bertha Keichler VS.. John Keicnler: d1-
vorce. Superior Court, Room l.
Daniel T. Cooper VS.. Polina j. Ritters
suit on account. Superior Court. Room 2
SAWS AND MILL SUPPLIES.