The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1897-03-13

the land sold by her guardian. notwith-
standing the sale was without notice.
INSPECTION-MACH SERVANT.
1765S. Randolph c. c. Cleveland, Cincin-
natl. Chicago q st. Louis Railway Com
pany VS.. Ward. Rehearing denied. How
ard, il. The fact that evidence strongly
contradicting that upon which the verdict
is based was also heard at the triai does
not justify reversal of the judgment. Z.
1T Is not enough that a railroad company
shall provide a competent inspector to in
spect It's locomotives and other machinery;
the inspection must actually be made with
skill and care to relieve the company from
liability for damages arising from defects.
3. The duty to inspect machinery devoives
cannot be rid of this duty except by caus-
Ing 1t TO be performed.
1871. Washington c. G. louisville, New
Albany & Chicago Railway Company VS..
Howell. Petition for rehearing overruled
1S05S. Marion c. G. Western Union Tele-
graph Company VS.. State. Petition for re-
Appellate Court.
NEW TRIAL - AFFIDAVIT - STATE
MENTS OF COURT.
2l25 Vigo c. c. Prudential Insurance
Company De Boord. Affirmed. Henley,
Jan affidavit which states that on the
morning OF the day d set for the tria ao oil
that the case could be continued indefinite
ly, and he then dismissed his witnesses and
that in the afternoon of the same day the
court called the case for trial and IL was
heard i'm the absence of defendants wit
nesses. who had been discharged in re-
lance upon statements of the court, but
which fails to state whether defendant had
valid defense TO the action. or could pre-
sent such defense at new trial; and t o.. does
continuance was not filed is insufficient
basis for motion for new trial
CONTRADICTORY NEGLIGENCE
KNOWLEDGE OF DEFECTS.
2095 Huntington c. C. Chicago & Erie
Railroad Company vs. Lee. administrator
that the plaintiffs decedent was injured by
catching his foot between some wires used
in operating an interlocking switch and a
rail and falling before a moving car and
that 'the wires were so small and SO near
the ground that they were not perceived by
the decedent before he was caught thereby,
and that he was ignorant or the danger.
and it was not 10 him apparent. Il not
equivalent to saying that decedent had no
knowledge of the defect in the roadbed
when injured. 2 A complaint to recover
for the death of employee caused by the
negligence of defendant in maintaining its
track and roadbed in defective condition
must aver that the decedent was Ignorant
of the unsafe condition of the roadbed n
general allegation that the decedent was
freg from dau r. bn knew knew Of tbe detects
i'm the roadbed he assumed the risk arts
ing therefrom. f. Ii was error 10 permit
a witness who did not see the defendant
fall 10 illustrate before the jury how the
accident must, in his opinion, have hap
pened.
INSURANCE AGENT-NOTARY PUBLIC
NOTICE.
2009 Delaware c. c. Shaffer ct al. VS..
Milwaukee Mechanics Insurance Company.
Affirmed. Wiley. il. motion for a
new trial made at the time judgment is
rendered on verdict which was returned
before the last day of a preceding term is
too late. and an exception To the over
ruling of such motion presents no question
. An insurance company is not bound by
notice of facts which come to the knowl-
edge of its agent who Is also notary
public and lawyer. in the performance of
professional duties not pertaining in any
way To the business of his principal. 3. a
provision in an insurance policy that II
should be void If the property became In
numbered was not waived by the company
merely because its agent. acting as a notary
public took an acknowledgment of q chat
tel mortgage on the insured property.
1915 Boone c. c. Head ct al. Doehcl-
man. Transferred to Supreme Court.
2s0l. Elkhart c; G; First National Bank
of George NJ. Ray from assignment OF
errors sustained.
Superior Court.
Room John l.. McMaster, Judge
Arthur c. Fosdyke VS. Mark A. Smith ct
al: note and foreclosure. Judgment against
NJ A Smith for ssI5. %
Albert Playfoot VS. John G. Harrison;
damages Judgment for defendant at plain
William H. Gresh vs.. Emma Deakin ct
al: mechanics lieE. Dismissed and costs
paid.
Room 2-I.awson NJ Harvey. Judge.
Mutual Bond and Surety Company VS.
Lucy Hill ct al. Judgment against defend
ant Hill for 1924 and costs.
IL. j. Millgan W. Equitable Trust Com
pany: damages Dismissed by p,intiff.
Room 3-Vinson Carter. Judge.
Butler University vs. Eliza a. Mccoy et