The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1897-12-09
THE COURT RECORD.


1S44O. Wakley VS. Town of Boswell. New
ton G. c. Reversed. McCabe, J.-lncorpo-
rated towns and cities are liable Tor dam
ing plank walks to become dangerous,
through which q person is injured while
walking thereon, using ordinary care under
the circumstances.
1912 Chicago Il Erie Railway Co. VS.
John. Huntington G. c. Affirmed, Hackney,
jim assessing the properties of a railroad
company, the company returns a schedule
and valuation of its property to the county
auditor, under oath, the value liked by MIN
upon such property, and in case he puts an
increased valuation upon the property he is
not required to give the company notice to
show, cause why such greater valuation
company Is required to place valuation on
the property is not that it may become
absolute, but that it may serve as evidence
1901. Boyer vs. Robertson. Carroll C. C.
Petition for rehearing overrued.
1861. Chicago & S. e. Railway Co. VS. Nc
Beth. Clay C. c. Petition for rehearing
1Sl72. Davis VS.. Talbot Montgomery c. c.
Petition for rehearing overruled.
1922. Hannah VS.. State of Indiana. Elk
hart G. G. Petition for rehearing overruled
Porter G. C. Appeal dismissed as to Henry
Appellate Court.
2293. Hickman VS., Quick Madison S. c..
Affirmed. Henley, III. An assignment Of
error which calls in question the conclu-
sions of law upon the facts found is an adj
mission of the correctness Of the facts
found. 2. Where A agreed with that if
the latter would locate his factory at a GER
tain town A would donate b a certain num-
Der of adjoining town lots. whereupon the
citizens of the town circulated a number
of subscriptions for the purpose of getting
persons to subscribe for and purchase the
lot donated. stated to the person So
Letting such subscribers that If the latter
We're not able to make the payments when
due as provided in the contract and would
make good notes he (AO would take the
ndH hn h
scribed for certain lots and executed his
notes. and A took the notes and advanced
the money to the credit OF 3. A having
suit upon the notes Held, that the notes
were not given for the purchase price of
the real estate, but for money, borrowed.
Affirmed. Comstock, il. An indemnity
bond must be read in the light of the con-
with surety. is given by man travelling
and selling by samples for the return to
the employers of the samples when ordered
in reasonably good condition, which bond is
accepted upon getting possession of the
sample goods the principal in the bond
absconds and fails to return the goods.
Held that by reason of the goods being in
trusted to the principal alone and not de-
llvered TO both principal and surety the
latter was not relieved from his obligation
on the bond when in the light Of the whole
contract the principal was to be intrusted
with the sample goods for the purpose of
exhibiting them and soliciting orders. In
livery of the samples is not necessary.
2ll0. Wabash Railroad Company VS..
Miller Allen S. G. Reversed. Black, il
In an action against a railroad company
for damages resulting from fire caused by
the negligence of the company the burden
is upon the plaintiff to plead and prove his
want Of contributory negligence; and when
special verdict is returned he will not be
entitled to judgment thereon in his favor
unless II be sufficiently shown by the YER
diet that ne was free from negligence prox-
lmately contributing TO the damage suffered
by him. 2 The question as TO the property
owners contributory negligence want OF
care before the fire must have reference 10
his right TO use his own property, with due
regard to the right of the railroad com
pany also to so use it's own as not to in
jure another. g. In Il special verdict facts
only should be found. and to entitle the
party having the burden OF the issue to a
Judgment in his favor all the facts essential
to such recovery must be found. Mere con-
illusions of law and matter of evidence
stated In the verdict will not serve the same
purpose as the finding of facts. 4. When