The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1898-11-16
THE COURT RECORD.


1882. Wabash Railroad Company VS.. Kay
Whitley c. c. Reversed. Jordan, il. A
special verdict must state all the material
facts within the issues OF the case and no
omission of a fact therein can be supplied
by intendment. 2 The failure OF Speclai
verdict to ind fact in favor of the party
upon whom the burden of establishing 1t
rests, is equivalent to finding against him
as to such fact 3. When the party having
the onus in a case asks judgment upon
special verdict the material facts therein
found within the issues must establish ms
right under the law to a judgment. 4.
Where the party moving for judgment upon
the special verdict is not the one upon
whom the burden Of the issue rests, his
right to be awarded a judgment does not
depend alone upon the presence OF ma
terial facts, but he may be entitled to the
Judgment by reason of the absence of some
essential fact which ii was incumbent upon
his adversary to establish. s. When per
son is employed to discharge hazardous du-
ties he assumes such risks as are ordinarily
incident to the discharge of the duties from
causes open and obvious, the dangerous
character of which he has had an oppor-
tunity to ascertain, but he does not assume
the risks of unsafe premises, ETC., unless
he has had, or may, from the facts or cir
cumstances, be presumed to have had
dangerous premises exists so long as to
charge an employee of the apparent danger,
the master will not be liable for damages
caused by him becoming injured on account
of such dangerous. premises.
1880 Long VS.. City of Portland. Jay G.
c. Reversed. Hackney, c; 1.-THE mere
hundred chickens and retained them in a
building within the city limits until the fol-
lowing Monday, when they were shipped
and during such time fed them where they
were retained, will not be sufficient to
charge him with violating an ordinance
prohibiting the feeding of more than fifty
fowls for marketing or slaughtering.
1889 Lumber Company VS.. Union, ETC.,
Association. Lake c. c. Rehearing granted.
1880 Lumber, Company VS.. Union, etc,
Association. Lake G. c. Rehearing granted
1887. Broden VS.. Thorpe Block, ETC., AS
G. Dismissed.
Appellate Court.
1888. State Of Indiana VS.. Tlncher. Sulli-
van c. c.. Affirmed. Wiley, IA private
residence, in the country, at which a num-
Der of persons have gathered to attend an
ice cream supper and dance, is not a pub
lie place" within the meaning of r. S. 1897,
1868. Myers VS. Green. Allen S. c. At
firmed. Henley, G. 1.-The acceptance of a
debtor will not discharge the entire iqui-
dated debt when it exceeds the amount Of
2S87. Broden VS.. Thorpe Block. ETC.. AS
sociation. Marion S. c. Petition for rehear-
2S52 Fidelity, ETC., Association vs. McDan-
Tel Marion c. c. Leave to file cross errors
Superior Court.
Room IL. L. McMaster, Judge.
Benedict Bannworth VS.. Louis Mueller;
quiet title. On trial by court.
L. Huff; foreclosure. Dismissed at plaintiff >
cost.
Room 2-Lawson M. Harvey Judge.
American Brewing Company VS.. John E.
Ferris; injunction and account. On trial by
Indiana Bond Company VS.. Leander A.
Fulmer ct al; street improvement lien
Finding for plaintiff. Foreclosure of lien.
United States Camera Company VS.. the
H. Lieber Company; contract. Finding for
defendant.
Room s-vinson Carter, Judge.
Charles A. Wilson VS. Citizens Street.
railroad Company; appeal. Finding VS.. de-
PENDANT for $25 and costs.
Dollie Kirchner VS.. Frank ]. Kirchner;
divorce. Granted plaintiff, with custody Of
child. Judgment VS.. defendant for costs.
Circuit Court.
Henry Clay Allen, Judge
Hannaford Bros. VS. r. Fl. Recess Estate.
Allowed by agreement for $4019 and costs.
Geo. T. Daniels ct al. VS.. Geo f. Kreit-
lem ct al geP ,ant P for costs py paln'
A. H. Berry Shoe Company VS.. Geo. F.
Kreitlen ct al; replevin Dismissed by
plaintiff Judgment VS.. plaintiff for costs.
A. M. Jenkins VS.. Horace @. Brown; APP
pealed from justice of peace. Dismissed for
want of prosecution. Judgment VS.. plaintiff
Henry Coburn VS.. New Telephone Com
pany: Injunction. Demurrer TO complaint
sustained. Plaintiff declines to appeal FUR
Their Judgment on demurrer VS.. plaintiff for
Court. Granted.
Dolores McCarty ct AL VS.. Wesley A.
Stout; replevin. Submitted to court. Evil
dence heard
New Suits Filed.
William w. Thornton ct al VS.. Caroline
Leonard; suit on account. Superior Court,
Room 2
George w. Ianier VS.. Rachel Lanier: d.
vorce Superior Court Room 2
Solomon West VS.. Addie West; divorce.
Supreme Court Room /.
John w Perham VS. Eva A. Perham;
divorce Superior Court, Room 3.
Lorenzo L. Taylor vs.. the Pittsburg, en-
cinnau Chicago & St. Louis Railway Com
pauy. damages. Superior Court. Room 2.
Ella Swicher VS.. Isaiah Swieher; SUIT for
divorce. Superior Court, Room 2
Elizabeth nj Manoosos VS.. Geo. Manoosos;
divorce. Superior Court. Room !.
Eliza Gully vs.. William Gully. suit for di-
yorce Superior Court, Room 3.
Sada Hyde vs. Albert Hyde; divorce Su-
peTior Court, Room 2
VIM ]. Holiday ct al vs. Stoughton G..