The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1897-11-03

places. whether spoken prior or subsequent
to the beginning of the action are admis-
sble in evidence without being pleaded. 4.
But in such cases, when the words intro
duced in evidence for this purpose, are ac-
tionable within themselves the court should
caution the jury not to give any damages
on their account. 3. When the question for
decision does not depend on the evidence,
the court will not determine whether the
evidence is in the record
1895. State of Indiana VS. Bates ct al. Sui
livan G. c. Reversed. Monk. 1.-THE mere
taking down in shorthand evidence given
before the grand jury is not violation of
law, but is in conformity with the law,
and will not be sufficient to abate the in
dictment without some showing that the &C
cused was injuriously affected by the pres
ence of the stenographer before the grand
jury.
Appellate COurI.
2148 Citizens Street-railroad Company VS..
Horton. Marion S. c. Reversed. Comstock,
il When a party has entered into a
voldable contract and wishes to be restored
to the rights he possessed before the con-
tract was executed, he must promptly dis
affirm the contract. 2. A party claiming to
be defrauded in signing a contract and
agreement, to release party from liability
Tor a personal injury, and having received
consideration for the execution of the
contract cannot ignore the same and pro-
coed in the assertion of his original rights
as if the contract had not been made with
out disaffirming such contract and substan-
TALLY restoring or offering to restore the
status quo.
2105. c., c., c. & ST. L. Railway Com
pany VS.. Wade. Dearborn G.. G. Reversed
Wiley, c. il. 1t is not negligence per sc
for a railroad company to have vestibule
cars attached to its passenger train. 2
Whether facts averred in the complaint and
found by the jury constitute actionable neg
hgence, the court will look to the special
verdict. 3. When a train of cars for car
rying passengers is drawn up along the
side of a station platform, it is the duty
of one who desires to take passage there
on to enter such train by way of the means
provided, but whether a person would be
negligent in entering from some other place
depends upon the facts surrounding each
case A. When railway company has
stopped its cars in front of a platform, and
when its servants are on the platform OPP
posite or near the doors and platform of
the cars to assist passengers to alight and
enter, and some of the cars attached to
the train should be sixty or more feet from
either end of the platform, where no pro-
vision has been made for the accommoda-
ton of passengers, and no one stationed to
direct or assist passengers, at such place
the company has not extended any invita-
ton to persons desiring passage to enter
the trains
1926. Wright VS.. Shelf Elknart c. C. At
| firmed. Robinson, il. When agreed
statement of facts are mere evidence they
must be brought into the record by bill of
exceptions. z. When an action in replevin
is brought against a constable to recover
property levied on by him to satisfy
Judgment, the description of the property
Sec. 1913 and 1914, must be harmonized with
the description of the property given in the
complaint.
1881. SeyboId VS.. T. H. & I. Railroad Com
pany. Cass c. c. Petition for rehearing
overruled
1872 Gates VS.. Newman. Marion S. C. Petit
ton for rehearing ovveruled.
1926. c. & S. e. Railway Company VS. Hig-
gins. Boone G. G. Transferred to Superior
Court.
2442 Coburn VS.. Sands. Marion s. c.
lNIranSferred to SllnqTiOr Court
Superior Court.
Room 2-Lawson NJ. Harvey, Judge.
John r. Sheperd VS.. Mamie Sheperd; d.
vorce. Decree granted plaintiff, with GUS
tody Of minor children.
charles F. Gordon VS. Christian Pothast;
appeal from ]. W. Sears, justice of the
peace Dismissed for want of prosecution.
Wilhelm fgai ATmetrnng 1t TOR coSs s tho
L. O'Connor Company; contract. Finding
for defendant; judgment against plaintiffs
for costs.
Room 3-Vinson Carter, Judge.
Jacob D. Hoss VS.. w. D. West ct AL;
lien: Finding and judgment for executor,
H. E. Smith trustee, for $462.90; finding for
plaintiff Sas0b D. Hoss for s7s5s
ministrator; replevin bond. On trial by
jury.
Circuit Court.
Henry Clay Allen, Judge.
w. H. Watt VS.. John Reynolds's estate:
Submitted to court, evidence heard and
claim allowed for $40 and costs against
estate.
Hugh Heston ct al. VS.. Horace Heston ct
al. partition. Plaintiff dismisses; judgment
against plaintiffs for costs.
Christian Wess VS.. Henry G. Seeeys es-
tate. Submitted to court, evidence heard.
finding and claim allowed for $132.50 and
costs against estate.
J. A. Sutcliffe VS.. John A Crag's estate;
claim allowed by administrator for 5000 and
costs against estate.
Hugh NJ Lash VS.. Jane T. Scott's estate;
claim allowed by administrator for $3.50
and costs against estate.
H. o. Painter VS.. Mary F. Trucksess's
estate claim allowed by administrator for
$3.50 and costs against estate.
Criminal Court.
John F. McCray, Judge.
The State of Indiana VS.. Edward Roetkin;
entering a house to commit a felony and
grand larceny. Defendant withdrew a plea
of not guilty of grand larceny; defendant
twenty-six years old; tried by court on first
count of the indictment. FINDING or not
guilty; fined S. and costs; sentenced to the
Indiana Reformatory for not less than one
year nor more than fourteen years.
The State of Indiana VS.. James moore;
petit larceny. Defendant released from jail
on payment of fine and costs.
The State of Indiana vs. John Miller: as
sault with intent to kill. On trial by jury.
New Suits Filed.
Stanley Conley VS. Elizabeth Conley ct
al: divorce and injunction. Superior Court,
Ann Anna Carr VS. Albert D. Carr; suit for di-
vorce Superior Court. Room l.
Margaret J. March VS.. Margaret y NC.
William H. Nichols VS.. Samuel Small ct
al: suit to foreclose mortgage. superior
Court Room 2