The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1899-01-04
THE COURT RECORD.
Snnreme Court.

1850 Rains VS.. the State of Indiana
Upton c. G. Affirmed. Jordan, il. Instruc-
lions to jury must be considered ana con-
strued together and not in detached parts,
and when so construed If they, as whole
correctly declare the law they will not be
overthrow although some fragmentary or
clear. 2. In the trial of criminal cause
the State is not required to prove beyond
a reasonable doubt every subsidiary or minor
fact or circumstance in evidence Whlcn
tends to establish the material or essential
facts upon which the ultimate question or
the defendants guilt depends. 5. When the
instructions, as a whole, are as favorable
to a defendant as he can legally demand
the cause will not be reversed on the IN
structions. 4. 1t is proper to exclude evidence
which is the bare opinion of the witness.
1854. Sterrett Us. Timmons. Carroll {. g.
Affirmed. Henley, il. When complaint
contains all the necessary aVermentS 1t is
proper to overrule a demurrer thereto. 2 In
an action in replevin the filing of the COM
plant and bond, the issuing and service of
the summons, and the appearance of the de-
PENDANT will give the court jurisdiction of
both the person and subject matter, and
the failure of the writ of repleVin to show
by the return of the officer who executed
it that the property was taken under 1T,
or what disposition was made of the prop
erty by the ofhcer does not affect the Jurls-
diction of the Circuit Court where the cause
is appealed from justice of the peace.
Appellate Court.
2621 Reynolds Company VS.. Oder.
Marion S. Q. Affirmed. Comstock, il. A
contract can only be rescinded in toto. 2.
A party cannot affirm such parts of a con-
tract which are of interest to him and
poste party. g. Where the execution of a
mortgage is procured by a contract such
parts of it as are of interest to the mort
gage cannot be affirmed by him and
such parts as are to his disadvantage re-
pudiated by him without the consent of the
mortgageor.
pany. Marion s. c. Affirmed. Robinson, j.
!. While foreman may direct certain work
to be done, yet if it is done by employees
who act upon their own judgment as to the
manner in which it is done and an employee
is injured in the performance of the work
it is an act of the fellow-servant and not
one for which the employer is responsible.
2 Where an employee is a mechanic and pro-
vides his own working place he has the
place is safe or not 3. When an employee
continues to work while his place in which
ne Is working is becoming dangerous for
caused by means open to his observation.
Superior Court.
Room FLAMES NJ. feathers, Judge
The Red Clay Orchard Company VS.. Jas
II. Smith. On trial by jury.
Circuit Court.
Henry Clay Allen, Judge.
William P. Wampler VS.. George w. Sill
der's Estate. Allowed by executor for Sizes
and costs against estate.
Flanner q Buchanan VS.. Geo. w. Slider's
Estate Allowed by executor for $50 and
Anna Orme, administrative, vs. T. S. Roll
linss Estate. Finding for defendant. Judg-
mgnt against claimant for costs.
John w. Carrier VS.. William T.. Want
land; on note. Submitted to court. Finding
for defendant Judgment against defendant
for $160.25 and costs.
tate. Submitted to court. Finding for
claimant. Judgment against estate for $40
and costs against estate.
Laura Thompson VS.. Frederick Ward 8
Estate. Submitted to court. Evidence heard
Finding for claimant. Judgment against es-
tate for $40 and costs.
Christian Wiese VS. Frederick B. Richter's
Estate. Submitted to court. Evidence
heard. Finding. for claimant Judgment
Q. s. Runnels VS.. Clara Cressler's Estate
Submitted to court. Evidence heard. Find
ing f for .. claimant Judgment against estate
Flanner & Buchanan VS.. Mary A. GiIPs
Estate. Submitted to court. Evidence
against f e5tae for SF and Sa dostg
Flanner & Buchanan VS.. James GilIs Es-
tate; Submitted to court. Evidence heard
FINDING dI for Dr. claimant Judgment against
Charles T. Whitsett VS.. Lavina L. Roachs
Estate submitted to court Finding for
claimant. Judgment against estate for $S425
and costs.
indianapolis Paint and Color Company VS..
John Hedlund's Estate. Submitted to court
Judgment VS.. estate for $l452 and costs
c. A. Barnes ct al. VS.. Daniel c. Huffman's
- ale, Allo"eu py administrator Tor $20S2
and costs against estate.
Francis w. Deboy VS.. Samuel Deboy's Es-
tate. Judgment on verdict for $500 against
estate for costs.
City vs.. caleb N Lodge. From City Court
Dismissed by plaintiff. Judgment against
plaintiff for costs.
Indiana Bond Company VS. Thomas H.
Shearer ct al. Improvement lien. Submitted
to court. Evidence heard
New Suits Filed.
Isaac L. Frankem VS.. Philip Hildebrand
ct al; suit to contest will Circuit Court
Alfred A. Hacker VS.. Catherine J. Hacker;
petition for divorce. Superior Court Room l.
=, Sadie James vs. William E. James; divorce
Superior Court, Room q
Harry w. Eastwood VS.. August Jensen jr.;
damages. Superior Court, Room 3.
Charles h. Gileand VS.. William p. Shell
by ct al; mechanics lien. Superior Court
Room 2.
Matte A. Kemp VS.. Franklin P. Kemp;
divorce. Superior Court, Room g.
Mary B. Reid VS.. Harry N Reid; suit for
divorce. Circuit Court.