The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1898-12-21

Gent facts. 2. If taking all the special find
lngS together and adding to them any other
Iacts that might have been proved under
the issues an irreconcilable conflict with the
general verdict can be avoided. the answers
10 the interrogatories will not be allowed
10 control. ). A person desiring TO nave IN
terrogatoriCs submitted TO the jury must
make the request and submit the interroga-
tories TO the court before the argument
commences or they may be properly re-
FUSED; the bill of exceptions must show that
the heterogeneous requested We're sub
united at the proper time TO raise a ques-
ton on the courts refusal 4. In case
where the plaintiff is seeking a recovery
for permanent injury it is proper to allow
a table of mortality to be introduced in evil
dence.
252l. Indiana. ETC., Gas Company VS..
Marshall Clinton c. c. Reversed. Robinson,
the master in furnishing safe appliances
with which he is TO work, unless the de-
feet is such that an ordinary prudent per-
son would observe it, 2 The implied as
sumption of the risks incident to the par
ticular work d servant is employed to do
does not extend to more hazardous work
outside of his contract of hiring, unless he
voluntarily goes into such hazardous work.
j. A plaintiff in order to recover must prove
all the material allegations of his complaint
and he cannot recover upon state of facts
different from those alleged although the
facts proven may make Z case. 4. When all
employe is notified by the principal that he
must not perform certain work it is his
duty to disregard an order of vice princi-
Pal to do that particular work, but If he
ulSIegdrQS the instruction OF the principal
and follows the orders of the vice principal
he does so at his own risk so far as the
master is concerned.
$3.50. Oldfather VS.. Gent. Porter c. c. At
firmed. Black G. il The action of the
trial court in OVerruling motion to strike
out testimony cannot be considered unless
the record shows that reason for striking
out the testimony was pointed out to the
trial court as the ground of the motion,
and also what reason was thus presented.
2 When the action of the court in not al
certain evidence infT06UCpd
to be questioned on appeal there should be
an exception taken to the ruling of the
Sec. $50, for proof of contradictory state
ments only relieves "A party in respect to
prejudieial testimony of his own witness
3374. Henry VS.. Moberly Clay c. G. APP
pellee petitions for rehearing and appellant
files motion to modify mandate.
Superior Court.
Room ii. l.. McMaster, Judge.
Maggie Morton vs. The Street-railroad
Company damages. On trial by jury.
Room Flames M. feathers, Judge
The Red Clay Orchard Company VS.. James
HI. Smith. ON trial by jury.
Albert J. Rice VS. George Franz; account.
judgment VS.. defendant for $5442, without
relief and costs.
John r. Mathews ct al VS.. Joseph C.
Swan ct al; foreclose mechanics lien.
Judgment vs. defendants Joseph G. Swan
and Thos. Hensley for $23.7S, without relief
and costs.
Room 3-Vinson Carter. Judge.
Ida Mae Pearson VS.. c.. c., c. & ST l..
Railroad Company; damages. On trial by
jury.
Circuit Court.
Henry Clay Allen, Judge.
John c. Ertel VS.. George G. Swain ct al
Foreclosure. Submitted to court. Evidence
heard in part.
VIM. V. Rocker VS. NJ NJ Cummings Es-
tate. Compromised, settled and dismissed at
cost of estate.
Francis NJ. Deboy VS.. Samuel Deboy's Els
tate. Evidence concluded
Pearl Ludwig VS.. Harry l.. Ludwig De-
PENDANT defaulted. Submitted to court Evil
denee heard. Finding for plaintiff, decree of
divorce Custody of child awarded to plains
TIL. Costs VS.. plaintiff.
Caroline Lee VS.. John ]. Smiths Estate
Dismissed by claimant. Judgment VS. claim
ant for costs.
Criminal Court.
Fremont Afford, Judge
State VS.. Thomas Hizer; grand larceny.
Trial by jury. Verdict of not guilty.
State VS.. John w. Banks; incorrigible.
Taken under Amusement.
State VS.. Walter Hulen and Francis
Balser; assault to kill. Defendants plead
guilty. Hulen sent to Indiana Reformatory
for two to fourteen years. Balser taken
under Amusement.
New Suits Filed.
Joseph e. Morrow VS.. William Houran;
Elizabeth j. Beal ct al. VS.. Jerome M
Scott ct al; partition. Superior Court,
ItOOM 4
Hasselman Printing Company VS.. Robert
Campbell ct al; attachment and garnish-
ment. Superior Court, Room g.
Alva g; May, administrator. ct al. VS..
Rose E. Wright ct al; mechanics lien. SUI
perior Court, Room j.
Eva Walton VS.. Milton Walton: divorce
Superior Court, Room l.
indiana Bond Company vs. John ID.
Bowles ct AL; improvement lien. Superior
Court, Room s.
Harlan T. Shirley VS. Emma Shirley; suit
for divorce. Superior Court Room 2