The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1898-02-04
SUPREME COURT CASES.
SEVERAL IMPORTANT OPINIONS
HANDED DOWy YESTERDAY.
Purchasing From Ones Self Forfeited
Policy-No Issue Interest on Costs.
other Questions Involved.

ed down BY the Supreme Court OF APP
| peals yesterday:
Harrison and wife VS.. Manson &c. Re-
versed Opinion by keith. T.
Turnbul was trustee In deed from
Harrison TO secure debt OF about $40
and interest. He sold the land. ana re-
ported Manson as the purchaser for 800.
| me bin asks that the deed 10 Manson
be annulled for fraud. alleging that Turn
Dull was himself the purchaser. The fact
| IL. however, that the $500 bid was made
| by Turnbull In the interest OF another
| creditor OF Harrison, whose deot wouid
otherwise be wholly lost
Manson brought unlawful detalner for
the possession OF the land from Harri-
son, plea OF rot guilty" and Judgment
In MS favor, which Judgment Is enjoned.
Held /. The plea OF mot guilty was
not such an election to pursue remedy
in one forum as to preclude resort TO an
otner. Had the plea been sustained. the
deed from Turnbul to Manson would still
nave been on record, and been such
cloud on the title as TO give equity iuris-
| dictlon 20 remove IT,
q While Il is true that there IS not
| particle OF evidence I'm the record having
even tendency 10 prove actual fraud or
moral turpitude against Turnbull, the
| sale TO Manson for the benefit OF another
cedinu that he nad no motive nor desire
10 inJure Harrison. that no better bid
could have been obtained. and that the
price was "A fair one: vet 20 all these con-
siderations the eyes Of the court are clos
ed by an inoxorable principle OF public
poiicy. lie was the trustee for Harrison
| TO sell the land. and nc could not. so long
as that relation existed, become the pur.
chaser himself. or purchase as the agent
OF another Exparte James, 3 Vesey 3ij
Buckets VS. Lanerty's Legatees. Rob
2o2: Howery W.. Helms. 20 Graft. I.
3 Measure OF relief To require Turn
quiz when guilty of no actual fraud 10
surrendered the property discharged OF
the lien wOulp be 10 perpetrate a greater
wrong I'm the name OF equity. than that
OF which appellants complain lie should
be protected 10 the extent OF permitting
MIN 20 hold the legal title TO the land until
| appellants pay the amount advanced by
him on the original debt secured and the
sum paid by him to the subsequent credi-
tor II not so paid an account should be
taken. II requested by any party in inter-
est. OF the rents and profits since IL was
sold. and OF any permanent improvements
thereon: and when these accounts have
been settled the property should be sold
and the proceeds applied IN accordance
with the principles herein stated.
FORFEITED POLICY.
Aetna Life insurance Company vs..
Rapsdale's Admir-. Reversed. opinion by
harrison, J.
on November -. 1896 the insurance
company insured Ragsdales life for 81 COO
Tor twenty years. the annual premium 70
be pafd M or before y clock =. NJ. on the
l3th day OF November each year during
the term OF the policy. on November
II. 1894. Ragsdale wrote 10 Baltimore
agents OF company asking for extension
OF time FOR second premium, about due
10 which they replied. November l3th'
agreeing 20 extension until December 18TH
and enclosing a note payable on that day
Tor said premium. without grace. The
note expressly stated that IT was given 10
extend time OF payment and If not paid
az maturity. there would be no further
extension, and said policy shall then
cease and determine. and be treated I'm
an respects as If the note and extension
had not been given
ON December TO- 1894. Ragsdale wrote
the agents requesting further extension,
10 which they replied on December nth.
complying with his request. but enclosing
a note similar 20 the former 20 be signed
by him, and returned I'm due course OF
mail.
on night OF December -. 1894 Ragsdale
now his administrator. called 10 see him.
10 this time Ragsdale had taken no ac-
ton as 10 the last letter. At the form
er's suggestion instead OF signing and re-
turning note. the latter forwarded the
cash. December llth in the morning, In
a p0stofice order
Raesdale died az $3.50 Z. NJ that day.
The letter and postolilce order were re-
ceived by the agents al Baltimore De-
H.
refusing 90 accept the cash, as the note
fell due December 18th. and stating that
Ragsdale was not insured after that
date: but enclosing a health certificate
which II filed out and returned with the
premium. the premium would be accept
cd.
Held l. While forfcitures are not fav-
orcd by the law yet any agreement, de-
claraton or course OF action on the part
Of the insurance Company which honest
~ tends 20 make assured believe that his
policy has been extended. will and ought
90 stop company from. insisting on n for
feitiure. though IL might be claimed UNI
der the express letter Of the contract.
insurance Company VS.. Eggleston, 90 l..
:. 5i2.
g. The right OF recovery here depends
upon whether the letter Of December H.
1894. constituted a completed contract be-
tween the parties. which bound the COM
rany 90 carry the policy in force TN De-
cem5er 81. 1894 IL seems clear that the
extension note and the receipt TO be given
therefor when executed, were together to
constitute the contemplated extension
contract. Despite the warnings OF the
company. Racsdale did not do his part.
and the payment OF The premiums after
policy had lapsed could not operate 20
revive It, except with consent OF the COM
pany
at IS clear that tho Insured has lost
the benefit OF this policy In consequence
of hts own neglect and through no fault
Of the company"
so ISSUE.
Franklin VS. Peers clerk Writ OF err
ror dismissed Opinion by judge Rely.
Controversy az t0 title 20 Office. After
judgment appealed from WAS rendered
ana before writ Of error applied FOR the
controversy as 10 title to Office was de-
tcrmined on its merits by the county
court In the mode prescribed by law.
Held; Whenever II appears or IS made
10 appear that there Is no actual contro-
versy between ltigants. or that II one ex-
isied Il mas ceased 20 do so 90 vs. the duty
of every judicial tribunal not TO determine
the apparent controversy but TO dismiss
the case. only real controversies and
existing rights are entitled 70 invoke the
exercise ~ the powers Of courts. When
II appears from the record. or from mat
ter OF which courts may take judicial no.
tice that a controversy has terminated
by lapse of time the writ OF error or
4rrsql vvflI ~. dfep,leao1 Chtro4fe ~