The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1898-10-28
THE COURT RECORD.


1887. State ex rels Bible VS. White. Mont
gomery {. e. Affirmed. Monks, i'm pro-
ceedings to establish highways in one coun-
" only, under Section 674S. Burns's r. S.
1894, the question of whether or not dam
ages shall be paid out of the county treas
ury IS one solely for the consideration and
determination of the Board of County Com
missioners. O. The statute contemplates
that the damages assessed for the estab-
llshing of highway may be paid by those
who desire the proposed road. 8. The board
OF commissioners in proceedings to establish
highways in more than one county have
the same discretion in regard to whether
the damages shall be paid out of the coun-
~ treasury that is. possessed by a board
OF commissioners In a proceeding to estab-
lish a highway in one county only A. Be
fore the boards Of commissioners can grant
the prayer Of a petition in a proceeding to
establish highway in more than one
county. each board must determine whether
the damages assessed are greater than the
utility. of the proposed highway; and If
majority Of such boards decide that the
damages are greater than the public utility
of the proposed highway the damages can
not not be paid out of the treasury of said
utility and the petitioners pay the damages
or so much thereof that the remainder not
paid is not greater than the utility of the
proposed highway, majority of said
boards may establish such highway s.
When verdict is returned in court assess
ing damages in favor Of the relator for
damages in the establishment of a highway
II is the duty Of the court to render the
proper Judgment for cost and order the
sioners of the counties wherein the high
way is to be located, for them to determine
whether the damages assessed are greater
than the utility of the proposed highway. 5
1867. Kline VS.. Board of Commissioners.
Huntington G. c. Affirmed. Jordan, il.
The board Of commissioners have power to
levy an additional assessment upon lands
benefited by the Improvement of a public
road when the original assessment proves
right Of ANN land oWer to that n
no case shall the aggregate assessments
made upon his land exceed the amount of
the benefits to the land by reason of the
Improvement. 2. A proceeding to secure an
additional assessment upon real estate for
completing public highway is not one
years statute of limitations does not apply
as defense to the assessment. Such as
sessment may be- made to reimburse the
county for money ii has paid on the i'm
provement. g. Where exception to the CON
clusions of law are made jointly all the
conclusions must be wrong in order to make
such exception available.
1855. Natchs VS.. Clark. Clinton C. c.
Affirmed. Howard, il. A judgment of
termination of all property rights between
the parties up to the date of granting the
divorce, 2. in rendering Judgment in ALI
took into consideration everything that
ought to affect the amount allowed and
the court is not required to be governed
by any agreement made by the parties be-
tween themselves.
Appellate Court.
2646. Carpenter VS.. C. & E. T. r. r. Co
Clay c. c. Affirmed. Henley, c. J.-When
an insurance policy is furnished the en-
ployes of a railroad company. the payment
for the insurance being made by the rail-
road company retaining the required
amount from the wages of the employees.
in order to render the railroad liable for any
loss under such policy of insurance there
must be al breach Of the contract declared
or the breach of duty owing to the in
sured or his benetciaries from said COM
pany growing out of the contract
1868. Garr-Scott Co. VS.. Wilson. Henry c. c..
Reversed. Black, il An employer has
the right to expect that his employee will be
vigiant for his own protection and careful
to avoid injury from known and obvious
risks; and the employe has the right to pre-
sumo that the employer has done his duty
in using reasonable care To provide safe APP
pliances and to inspect them at proper
times. 2 An empioye is not obliged 10
search for defects in machinery or to exer-
else like diligence with the employer to dis
cover defects in machinery. g. In an action
by an employe against his employer for
personal injuries. caused by defective ma
chinery, 1t is incumbent upon the plaintiff TO
show himself free from knowledge of the
defects which caused the injury but the
complaint need not show afflrmatively that
plaintiff had no means of ascertaining the
defect. 4. The taking of an exception at the
time of the ruling of the court may be
shown by bin OF exceptions. ,. The mere
fact that the hill of exceptions contains
more than may be presented by the bill will
not cause Ii to be rejected. 8. Evidence
should have a legitimate bearing upon the
question in issue. Z. When it is alleged
that an injury was caused by allowing a
certain piece of machinery to get out OF
order ii is error TO admit evidence showing
that other machinery or appliances had been
defective when there Is no showing that the
cause of their defects affected the machinery
whose Effectiveness is the basis of the
charge OF the complaint.
237s. Manufacturers Gas Company VS..
Leslie Madison c. G. Reversed. Wiley. j.
In a proceeding TO appropriate an easement
in lands for the purpose of laying natural
gas mains under the provisions of the act
of 1889 +. % Ser. 5103. r. S. 1894 ct seq.
when appeal is taken from the report of the
appraisers damages for leakage of gas per-
meating the soil and entering the bitches
causing explosions and loss Of crops and
explosion of gas causing damages to per-
sons and stock" are not recoverable.
Superior Court.
Room 1--Hon. ]. ~. McMaster. Judge
George Cook vs. VIM r. Owens. Appeal
from Wapole j. r. Finding for defendant.
The keylcss Lock Company ct al. vs.. Geo.