The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1897-05-27

not make ii a double pleading unless such
Iacts show good right of action for the
alleged conversion.
TOWNSHIP TRUSTEE-POWERS
BTLITY OF TOWNSHIP.
2216. Boone c. c. Clinton School Town
ship VS. Lebanon National Bank. Reversed.
Robinson, il. a township trustee is a
special agent with limited powers, and can
bind the township only when he does what
the statute authorizes and does ii in the
manner prescribed. 2. Persons dealing
with township trustee are bound 10 take
notice of his limited powers and he can
not create an estoppel against the town.
ship by acts outside his statutory powers.
s A township can be heid liable IN equity
for money borrowed by the township trus-
tee with which to pay a debt of the town
ship and actually applied to that purpose,
so that the debts is Cancelled. l. A town
ship is not liable for money paid to the
township trustee upon checks drawn in
favor of certain school teachers employed
by the township and converted to his own
use by such trustee, who. at the time he
drew such checks had no money in the
bank upon which he drew them. and was a
money, no matter what representations he
made to induce the person to cash the
checks. .. 1t is only where the general
denial has already been pleaded that sus-
denial is harmless.
DISMISSAL OF APPEAL-RULE OF
COURT.
1859. Grant c. c.. Farwell Company VS..
Newman ct al. Appeal dismissed. Com
stock, il. The court cannot dispense with
any of the steps required by statute to per-
feet an appeal 2. Where a term appeal
was prayed at the time judgment was rem
dered, but no bond was filed and the tran
script was filed nearly year after tinai
Judgment the appeal must be held to be
vacation appeal B. A cause appealed IN
vacation will be dismissed unless the ap-
pellee appears or some steps are taken 10
bring him into court within ninety days
after the appeal is docketed as required by
Rule 80.
LIFE INSURANCE-PREM NOTES
FORFEITURE.
2103. Delaware c. c. Union Central Life
Insurance Company VS.. Jones. Affirmed.
Black, il, A forfeiture provided for by
written contract upon conditions therein
specified will not be enforced unless its en-
forcement is clearly demanded by the estab-
lished rules for the construction of written
contracts. q If the language of a policy
of insurance is susceptible of a construction
sustaining the claim for indemnity on the
part of the insured, that construction Will
be given it. although 1t would also bear
which would defeat such claim.
8. Where notes are given in payment OF
the premiums upon a life insurance policy
which provides that the company may, at
its election, upon failure to pay any or such
notes at maturity, cancel the policy, IN
which case all overdue notes may be col
lected, but all not yet due shall be there
upon surrendered to the maker upon sur
render of the policy, the company must
strictly pursue the method OF forfeiture so
provided or it cannot defeat the policy
after collecting by suit all the premium
notes that fell due before the death OF the
insured. 4. The entry of a cancellation OF
the policy upon the companys BOOKS Tor
failure to pay one note at maturity was
waived and rendered void by enforcing the
collection of a subsequent premium note
falling due year later.
APPELLATE COURT-JURISDICT
EQUITABLE CASES.
2174 Marion S. c. PuIlen ct al. VS.. Nc
Zoo of Il Tran efpT Supreme
Henley, il. Appeals from judgments
granting equitable relief as well as money
recovery should be taken to the Supreme
Court 2. Where damages for a nuisance
and relief by injunction were sought and
granted the appeal lies only to the Supreme
Court.
= PLEADING = BURDEN
OF PROOF.
21S3. Randolph C. c. Miller VS.. Miller.
Affirmed. Robinson, il. Every complaint
must proceed upon a single, definite theory,
which is to be gathered only from the gen.
eral scope and tenor of the pleading, and
if more than one theory be supported by the
language used the court may construe 1t
as proceeding upon the one most apparent
and most clearly authorized by the. facts
stated, and require the case to be tried upon
that theory 2. A complaint alleging that
the defendant had "purposely and neg
ligently,, permitted a quantity OF stubbles
drought, to which, on a day when high
wind was blowing. toward plaintiffs land,
WITHOUT any fault or negligence Geo on f,i the
and neglgently'' set fire and allowed the
fire to escape from his control, and "by
reason Of the carelessness and negligence
plaintiffs property, and that '"said fire was
not the result of any fault. carelessness or
ne OF ens Pail nnry The &c ehar gs
that an act was purposely done in such
case does not amount to a charge that 1t
was willfully done. T. An act which is will
nj npPliRentlV done
as the two are inconsistent 5. To entitle
the plaintiff to recover he must show by
the defendant was negligent, and that he
was himself free from any negligence prox-
lmately contributing to his injury.
DEFECTS IN STREETS-LIABILITY OF
TOWN.
21S0. Greene C. c. Worthington VS.. Nor
gan. Affirmed. Black, il. The. rule I'M
der which counties, as mere subdivisions
of the state, are held not liable for the
negligence of their officers in suffering high
ways and bridges to become defective un-
less made so by express provision of a
statute, has no application to towns. q An
incorporated town has exclusive power over
its streets and must use ordinary care to
keep them in a reasonably safe condition
for travellers thereon, or answer in damages
to any such traveller who, while in the ex-
ercise of reasonable care is injured because
of defects which the town authorities have
hegligently permitted TO exist in street.
REINSTATEMENT OF APPEAL-FIL-
ING BRIEF-EXTENSION TIME.
2294 Madison S. c. Cline VS.. d. Pc
tition to reinState appeal OVerl Hen
ley, Jan appeal dismissed fol failure
to file a brief within sixty days as required
by Rule 10 will not be reinstated on show
ing that the sickness of both members of
the firm of attorneys who were senior coun-
sci and had principal charge of the case,
prevented the completion of a brief which
had been begun about three weeks before
the sixty days expired where no reason is
given for not applying to the court for an
extension of time in which to file the re-
quired brief after counsel We're taken sick
and before the sixty days expired.
RAILROAD PASSENGER-BRE OF
ONTRACT-DAMAGES.
Company VS. Rinicker. Affirmed. Com
stock, il. A party can only question the
size of the sum awarded as damages by
assigning as a cause for new trial that
there was error in the assessment of the
amount of damages. 2 A railroad COM
pany is liable in damages for failing TO per-
form it's contract to carry a passenger to
the place to which it has sold him a ticket
by reason of not stopping the train upon
which he has taken passage at its invitation
so that he can safely alight at such station
3. Where the railroad company carried a
young girl beyond the station TO which she
had bought a ticket, and, after promising
to back up to the platform, carried her a
quarter of a mile beyond the next station
where it put her off at o'clock a. m, put
in broad daylight. from which she WalKsu
to her brothers, mile distant wnotl sne
wished to visit the court Will not disturb
a verdict for $500, awarded upon the secoho
trial of the case.
WRITTEN CONTRACT-PAROL STlPO-
ONS-EVIDENCE.
2204 Noble c. c. Singer Manufacturing
Company VS.. Suits. Reversed. CoIhStoch,
j. 1-When a written contract IS e&sfoo ,dl