The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1897-12-16
THE COURT RECORD.
Supreme Court.

lSl12. Roach VS.. Clark. Elkhart &. &. Re
versed. Hackney, i'll. Where the remedy
sought by or against an estate is not pro-
vided by the probate procedure act, 1t must
be enforced under the civil code. 2. Where
a proceeding is instituted for writ of as
sistance to place the petitioner in possession
of real estate purchased by him at an ad-
miniStratOrs sale, such proceeding is one
of an equitable character within the juris
diction of the courts of chancery, and an
appeal from the judgment of the trial court
is governed by the general CODE 3. An APP
plication for a writ of assistance cannot be
recognized to supply remedy to quiet til
tie; II was designed remedy for the en-
forcement of right already determined
by court of equity and which determine
ton one Of the parties refuses to recognize
Affirmed. Howard, c.. i'll. When the rec
ORD is so incomplete that neither it nor the
briefs of counsel show upon what grounds
the judgment of the trial court was based,
such JUDGMENT will be affirmed 2. Refer
ence to entries in a record should be made
with such certainty that nothing would be
left to conjecture.
Appellate Court.
$780, State VS.. Buskirk Montgomery c.
G. Reversed. Black, J.-Where the in
formation charged that the defendant did
then and there unlawfully sell for the pur-
pose of gain, certain quantity of malt
liquor, to-wit, lager beer. to one Matthias
Yearion in a less quantity than five gallons
at a time, tO-wit, one quart, he, the said
Buskirk 01efendant) not having at the time
valid license under the laws of said State
to so sell malt liquor as aforesaid. etc,
1t IS governed by Section 2lS6, Burns r. S.,
1894, and punishable by the fine therein pro-
vided.
1881. State VS.. Buskirk. Montgomery c.
c. Affirmed Black J-When a person is
charged with unlawfully selling of liquor,
the indictment or information should con-
tain d statement of the facts constituting
the offense in plain and concise language
indicating what misdemeanor it is by show
ing it to he within the meaning of the stat
uteS describing the offense and prescribing
the punishment therefor it must show a
sale or barter or gift for purpose of
gain.
1947. Pope VS.. Lathrop. Wells c. c. Petit
ton for rehearing overruled.
1890. Butler VS.. p. c., G. & ST L. Rail-
rehearing overruled. ~gsIe
2OO5. Weser VS.. WeItz Upton C. C. Pc
tition for rehearing oYerruled.
Certiorari granted
1853. Green VS.. State Of Indiana. Henry
c. c. Petition for permission to appeal dis
Superior Court.
Room 2.-Lawson nj. Harvey, Judge.
Mary Ballard, administrators VS.. Citizens
Street-railroad Company ct al; damages.
On trial by jury.
Room S-vinson Carter Judge.
George Hiden VS.. Isabel IIiden; divorce
for costs.
Andrew Schackel VS. William f. Schackel:
proceedings supplemental to execution. De-
PENDANT examined and dismissed; costs
against plaintiff.
Julia Schroth VS. Henry J. schroth ct al
support. Dismissed for want of prosecution;
judgment against plaintiff for costs.
Daniel O'Brien VS.. Dennis Tobin ct al;
foreclosure. Defendant defaulted
Thomas Hayes ct al. VS.. Thomas Kear-
ney; account. Finding of judgment for
d. X. Wilson VS.. Consumers Gas Trust
Company; damages. Jury instructed to find
for defendant.
Circuit Court.
Henry Clay Allen. Judge.
State ex rel Dora Hardin VS.. Leander
Hardin; fraudulent marriage. Evidence con-
Guided and jury retired.
New Suits Filed.
al; suit to foreclose mortgage. Superior
Court, Room 2.
The Indiana Bond Company VS.. William
A. Bradshaw ct al. Superior Court,
Allen NJ Fletcher VS.. John w. Lewis ct
al; suit on notes. Superior Court Room 8.
Indiana Bond Company VS.. Charles L.
Reynolds ct al; street lien. Superior Court
Room /.
William P Herod, administrator VS. Will
liam f. King; suit on note. Superior Court,
Room I. ef78g
suit for accounting. Circuit Court.
Anna Boord VS. Ambrose Boord ct AL. /;
suit for support. Superior Court, Room g.
Charles Syerup ct al. VS.. Adam w. Sherer;
suit on account. Circuit Court.
James l.. Reach VS.. Adam w. Sherer; suit
on account. Circuit Court.
The indianapolis News Company VS.. the
Bellevue Land and Improvement Company;
suit on note. Circuit Court
HerVey B. Fatout VS.. the Bellevue Land
and Improvement Company; suit for re-
ceiver Circuit Court.