The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1897-01-29

Nenlcle ne must allege in MS complaint
and prove by a fair preponderance of the
evidence that the injury was caused With
out any negligence on his part 2. To back
an engine and cars across a street In a
town at the rate Of eight miles an hour
without sounding the whistle or ringing
the bell, or without having some one on
the car to give warning OF its approach, Is
sufficient to establish negligence on the
part of those operating the train. 8. Al
though a person may be the guest of the
driver of a vehicle, ii is his duty TO look
and listen when approaching a railroad
crossing; and the fact that he has his ears
covered by eartips and that there are
~sleighbells on the horses imposes the duty
OF Increased care on his part to look and
listen for approaching danger.
2O65. Wright VS.. Tomlinson. Montgom-
cry c.. c.. Affirmed. .Comstock. i'll. a
married man requested in writing an insur-
ance company, in which he held a policy
on life payable to his estate, to change
the beneficiary and make the same payable
10 his wife. At the tine OF asking the
of his health. He died on the same day.
The policy was at his home in Indiana.
The rules of the company prescribe, the
mode in which a change might be made in
the beneficiary, and the letter was not In
the manner prescribed. He was insolvent,
and the policy had been taken out two
years before his death and while he was
unmarried. Held, that his request for the
transfer and his expressed intention to give
the policy to his wife amounted TO an equi-
table assignment of the policy, and that any
act which indicates an intention 10 transfer
the interest in a policy will be held good,
subject to the claims of creditors to avoid
the transfer as a fraud on their rights.
2. The law favors the making of a reason
able provision by a man for his family de-
pendent upon him, and it is not in fraud of
creditors for a debtor, though insolvent,
70 pay a reasonable amount for insurance
for the benefit of his family. 3. 1t is a
mans duty to make reasonable provision
for his family.
1865. Town of Salem VS.. McClintic.
Washington c. G. Affirmed. Henley, j..
Il. Sureties are favorites of the law and
are not bound beyond the strict terms of
the engagement, and their liability cannot
be extended by Implication beyond the
strict terms of the contract. .. Where a
town employs an officer as superintendent
of water works and caused him to give
bond for the faithful performance of his du-
ties his duties should be set out in the reso-
luton of the trustees of the town creating
Such Office and in the bond by which he is
bound to the service.
Superior Court.
Room John l.. McMaster. Judge.
Martha Worley VS.. Leander Fulmer;
note. Finding and judgment for plaintiff
for 81. 540.1 Is and costs.
Jonathan Guyman VS.. Arthur Jordan.
Finding and Judgment for plaintiff for $50.
a. M. Ogle VS.. j. p. Walsman; fore
closure. Receiver appointed TO collect
rents.
Room 2-Lawson NJ. Harvey, Judge.
Allan Jennings VS.. Caleb S. Denny eft al;
damages for malicious prosecution. On
trial by jury. Evidence concluded. Argu-
ment of counsel being heard.
Room 3-Vinson Carter, Judge.
Sarah Shackelford VS.. Margaret z. Roy;
damages. Jury failed TO agree and dis
charged by court.
Maud Bailey VS.. John NJ. CASTOR; dam
ages. On trial by jury
Daniel c. Mitchell. administrator Sarah
a. Mitchell. VS.. Miller w. Hubbard ct al;
note. Finding and judgment for plaintiff
against defendant for 81, 1878 and costs.
E-a.-- .-
Frank McCray, Judge.
The State of Indiana VS.. Erick Linden
borg: provoke. Appeal from Hay, j. p.
Certified back TO lower court.
borg; profanity. Appeal from Hay, j.. p.
Nollied by the State.
The State of Indiana vs.. Charles Hamil-
ton; grand larceny. Plea of guilty TO petit
larceny. Fined 81 and sentenced to the
workhouSe for six months.
State VS.. Charles Ludwig; receiving stolen
goods. On trial by jury.
Circuit Court.
Henry Clay Allen, Judge.
On motion of F.. j. Van NorhiS, Charles
+. Beach is admitted to the bar.
Charles S. Mum ct al. vs.. Christian
Wishmeier. Jury instructed, retired and
returned verdict for plaintiff.
Indiana Bond Company vs.. Bridget Hirth;
street lien. Dismissed and costs paid.
New Suits Filed.
Andrew Stefin vs.. Chauncey Hawley; on
appeal bond. Room 2.
r. O. Haworth VS.. Clay Whitley ct al;
Stephen j. Ward VS.. John S. Thurman;
replevin. Room 8.
Dane S. Dunlop VS.. Warwick Fl. Ripley
ct al. foreclosure. Room 3.