The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1898-10-12
THE COURT RECORD.


THE COURT RECORD.
Supreme Court.
1863 Insurance Company VS.. Martin.
Whitley c. c. Reversed. Jordan, J.-Where
a fire insurance policy contained mort
gage clause" that, in case of loss by fire
the money paid on the insurance policy
should be paid to the mortgage in dis
charge of the mortgage debt, and If in
should pay said loss to the mortgage, and
should claim as to the mortgageor it was
not liable for the loss SO paid, it should
be subrogated to the rights of the mort
gagee and should receive an assignment
of the note and mortgage to the extent
or said payment and where the same policy
contained prohibitory clause against the
transfer alienation of the property in
sured, without notice to the insurance COM
pany, the real estate having been subse-
quently transferred without such notice
having been given and the vendee being I'M
aware of the existence of the insurance
policy, or any of its conditions, although
1t provided that the policy might be as
signed to the person succeeding to the own
ership of the property by the consent OF
the insurer Endorsed on the policy; but
without such consent the insurance should
cease from the date of the change of own
ership; when subsequent to the transfer the
property insured having been destroyed by
fire and the amount of insurance paid to
the mortgage who assigned to the insurer
an interest in the note and mortgage equal
TO the amount of insurance paid who
brought an action to foreclose the mortgage
mortgageor nor his vendee had any rights
in the insurance policy and thereafter the
insurer owed them no duty and they were
not entitled to have the proceeds from the
insurance policy paid to the mortgage for
the benefit of either of them. And that the
plaintiff was entitled to foreclose the mort
gage held by way of assignment from the
mortgage.
1s41S. Peerless Stone Company VS.. wray
Monroe c.. c. Affirmed, Howard, il. If an
amended complaint does not introduce A
nf ion hos rnfn 70 he
time of the filing of the original complaint.
2. Unless some new claim or title not
previously asserted is set UP in an amended
complaint, a plea of the statute of limita-
tons will be determined with reference to
the date when the action was originally
commenced. 9. Where laborer in a stone
quarry was injured by the falling of a
bank OF clay which he could not by due
dillgence have known to be dangerous, and
that the dangerous condition was known to
a superior officer in time to have warned
said workman of the danger, and who as
sisted the fall of the bank by standing upon
It in the time of danger, the employer is
liaDle TO the workman for damages caused
by the injury.
1850. Hart VS.. ORourke Tippecanoe S.
c. Affirmed. Monks, il A void judgment
may be enjoined. but if judgment is mere
ly irregular or erroneous, though reversible
on appeal it is not subject to collateral at
tack. z. Where an action is brought against
party for the collection Of debt and an
affidavit and undertaking for a writ of gar
nishment is filed against third party, al
though the grounds, of attachment are not
ton of both parties, a judgment rendered
against them is not void, although it may
be erroneous. and is not subject to collat-
eral attack.
1897 Town of Winamac VS.. Hess
Marshall c. G. Petition for rehearing over
ruled.
Appellate Court.
232S. Boyce VS.. Schroeder. Laporte S. c.
Affrmed: Henley. c. il. In complaint
seeking damages caused by the breaking of
a truck used to haul lumber on, which
plaintiff was employed to operate, it is not
necessary that the complaint aver that the
plaintiff carefully examined it before pro-
ceeding to use it. 2. When a master places
an implement in the hands of the servant
he implicitly undertakes that it is sound
and fit for the use for which it is intended
and that he VIII exercise ordinary care and
prudence to keep 1t in such condition. g.
Where the jury has been ordered to return
special verdict, the giving of instructions
generally as to ne law of the case is i'm
proper.
2501. Naglebaugh VS.. Harder Co. Sullivan
G. G. Affirmed. Wiley, J.-Where a company
issued and circulated brass checks among its
employees, which represented money due
certain store 'in trade" and are purchased
from the laborers to whom issued as evil
dence of their claims. the purchaser takes
them charged with knowledge of their in
firmities and cannot recover from the COM
pany which issued them the amounts repre-
sented by the checks by making them the
1851. Norris VS.. Churchill. Rush c. c. Petit
ton for rehearing overruled.
Superior Court.
Room 2-Lawson M. Harvey, Judge.
Christopher F.. Rafert VS.. Henry c. Rafert:
note. Judgment VS.. defendant for $282.61 and
costs.
Theodore F.. Smither VS.. VIM. V. Rocker.
account. On trial by jury
Chas. c. Becker VS. Frank M. Wright:
mee en- lien Judgment vs. defendant for
nv i 1nrfn
Chas; Fink VS.. Joseph Bremen ct al. !;
lease Finding for plaintiff and judgment VS..
defendant for So, 1880 and costs.
Clancy Wallace VS.. Mary E. Wallace. d.
vorce Dismissed by plaintiff at his cost.
Room e-yinson Carter, Judge.
VIM. Ernsting VS.. Herman Fuehring ct
al: note Finding and Judgment VS. defend
ant ant Herman Fuehring for s157.7O and costs.
against plaintiff for costs.
Louise Conklin VS.. Warren Conkln ct
al; support. Plaintiff dismissed as to de-
PENDANT Union Railway Company. Judgment
Geo. J. Mayer vs. Joshua c. Stamford
ct al; on bond. Finding for plaintiff for
Edward Kaser VS. Eta Kaser. divoroe
On trial by court.
Circuit Court.
Henry Clay Allen. Judge.
Margaret f: Peelle VS.. the Provident Fund
Society of New York; on policy. On trial
NY jury.
New Suits Filed.
F. A. Grever & Sons VS.. Rebecca Sohreid-
erman;. suit on account Superior Court,
Room s.
Charlotte o. Malone VS. Louis A. Malone.
suit on Judgment. Superior Court, Room 2
Laborers Saving and Loan Association.
No. 2: VS.. William c. Rehling; suit on note.
Circuit Court.
William s. Martin VS.. William A. Saxton
ct al suit on note. Superior Court, Room /.
Chancey Wallace VS.. Mary E. Wallace:
suit for divorce. Superior Court Room l.
Mary Mills VS.. Leander Mills; suit for
divorce. superior Court, Room l.
Anna M. Moore VS.. James NJ Moore: suit
for divorce Superior Court, Room 2.
World Building and Investment COMPANY
vs. zachary I. Boicourt ct al; mortgage.
Superior Court, Room 2.
Jennie N. McQueary VS.. James l.. Nc
Queary; suit for divorce. Superior Court,
Room 3.
German American Building Association OF
Indiana VS. Albert r. Tucker ct al: suit on
notes. Superior Court Room s.
Part of Baney's "Swag" Identified.
The trial of Noah Baney his wife, Della
Baney, ard his brother-in-law, William
Short for grand larceny. was continued un-
til Friday in Police Court yesterday morn
:ng. to give the detectives time to visit
Baney's farm, in Morgan county. They