Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1896-07-31

her absence 70 dispose Of this interest
and transfer Il 10 another Is void.
Afaddock's Administrative VS.. shinkcT'
ct al From the Hastings Court OF tne
| city OF Roanoke. Reversed. opinion DS
Judge Rely. II was held In this case
first. that the entire amount OF the Judg
mont controversial by the appellant was
the matter in controversy on the appeal.
and that being over $500, exclusive OF
costs. the motion to dismiss the appeal
should be overruled Second, that II y
not the duty of q commissioner TO re-
turn the evidence on which his report y
based unless directed TO do so by the
court. or requested by one OF the parties
and upon an exception to the report on
the ground that IL is not supported by
the evidence, the exception must be over
ruled. unless the exceptant takes the
proper steps to bring the evidence before
the court so that the court may review
s. Third. that a separate creditor o.
one OF the partners of firm cannot Cd
tain more by a levy OF his execution on
the partnership property or under the
lien thereof than the share OF his dep'oi
In what may remain after paying az
the firm debts and adjusting the ac-
counts between the partners themselves;
that the interest OF eacn partner In the
partncrship properly is his share or the
surplus after all the firm debts are paid
and a balance is struck between the
partners. and that II IS only this inte-
rest. so ascertained. that is subject 10
the lien of the execution OF the lndi-
vldual creditor
QUESTION OF LIEN.
Hickman. by &C. VS.. Hickman ct ais
From the Circuit Court Of Roanoke coun-
~. Reversed. opinion by Judge Rely.
The question in this case was In regard
TO the priority of a lien upon real estate
between a deed of trust TO secure credi-
tors. and a decree for money rendered
IN vacation against the grantor in the
deed. The decree was made and returned
10 the Clerks Office on the same day that
the deed was admitted to record, ana
afterwards duly placed on the lien docket.
Held: 1 That judgments and DEGREES re-
covered or entered by the court In term,
whenever the action or cause In Whlch
the Judgment or decree was recovered, or
rendered. was in such condition that II
might have been tried on the iirst Gay
of the term. If IL had happened TO occupy
the first place on the docket, take enect
as of the first day of the term, ana that
the lien thereof begins at the first moment
NJ the day. and that there is no difference
In respect to the commencement OF the
lien between judgments and DEGREES re-
covered or rendered in term, and jrcg-
ments and DEGREES confessed or rendered III
vacation. 2, That where the Legislature
has departed from the common-law prin-
ciple of the unity OF the day, its purpose
has been plainly declared, as in the mat
ter of executions, where ii has required
the officer to endorse the time OF Inc cay
as well as the day when he receives II,
and in respect to deeds OF trust ana
mortgages which are declared TO be Vclu
as 10 purchasers and creditors, except
from the time they are admitted to record
and whore two of more deeds of trust or
mortgages. embracing the same property
are admitted to record on the same day
that which was first admitted 10 record
has priority.
state Savings Bank VS.. Stewart From
the Hastings Court OF Roanoke. A1irmeu.
Opinion by Judge Buchanan.
OTHER OPINIONS.
Ecket's Administrator VS.. the Norfolk
and Western railroad. From the Hastings
Court Of Roanoke city. Opinion by Judge
Buchanan.
old Dominion Investment Company vs.
Noomaw. Opinion by Judge Cardwel.
From the Hastings Court of the city OF
Roanoke. Affirmed.
Donaldson VS.. Levine. opinion py
Judge (df0Well. GIpH l'iN t'u'e'--1-
Court of the city of Roanoke. Afhrmed.
Atlantic and Danville Railroad Com
many VS.. James. Writ Of error and SUI
nersedeas to the Hastings Court OF the
citv of Portsmouth. Bond, 5000,
Same VS. Iromonger. Writ OF error
and supersedeas. From the same court.
Same bond.
Allegheny County vs.. Parish. From the
Circuit Court Of Allegheny county. APP
neal and supersedeas Bond, $50.
Hotchkiss and others VS.. Middlekamp.
From the Circuit Court Of Rockingham
county. Appeal and supersedeas' Bond
$500.
Evnon VS. Crescent Horseshoe and
Iron Company. From the Circuit Court
of Wythe county. Writ Of error awarded
Bond. $50.
Supreme Lodge Knights Of Honor VS..
Oeters From the Law and Equity Court
of the city Of Richmond. Writ OF error
and supersedeas. Bond. 5000.
Rorer a. Didier VS.. Payne, Shelon q
Co. Appeal and supersedeas From the
Hastings Court OF the city of Roanoke
Bond, 500.
Sewers and others VS.. Roller. From
the Circuit Court of Rockingham county.
Appeal refused.