The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1899-10-06
THE COURT RECORD.
Sunseme Court.

1852. Metzeer VS.. Hubbard. St. Joseph
G. c. Affirmed. Monks. J.-Where a prom
issory note was Endorsed by the payee IN
the following language: For value received
/ hereby sell and assign the within note
to 8 . and guarantee the payment and
collection of the same. and agree to pay all
attorneys fees. and do waive presentment
for payment, protest and notice OF protest
and nonpayment of the same, all without
relief from valuation and ap2raisement
laws" and subsequently the indorsee died
and the executor sold and assigned said note
by Endorsement to appellees. held that the
first indorser was liable on his contract OF
Endorsement. as it was a direct and abso-
lutte undertaking to pay the note, and that
neither OF his subsequent indorsers owea
him the duty 10 collect or attempt to collect
the same from the maker of the note, and
that their laches. If any did not discharge
1858. City of Huntington vs. Folk. Wa
bash c. C. Affirmed. Jordan, c. il. Where
a complaint is amended after a motion. to
make more specific is overruled and pending
a demurrer addressed to the same. in the
absence of the amended complaint from the
record this court will assume that the In.
firmities in the complaint az complained or
were cured by the amendment. :. When
an amended pleading is filed 1t supersedes
the original, and the latter goes out OF the
record, and this court must assume that the
amended pleading was the one upon which
the cause was tried, and where the amend
ed pleading Is absent from me RECORD no no
considered. 3. An application for a delay or
continuance of a cause Is addressed 10 inc
sound discretion or tne lfldi dho
where. for the reasons stated. it is not
clearly disclosed on appeal that such dis
erection has been abused TO the injury OF
the complaining party, the refusal 10 grant
the continuance Will not be available error.
Appellate Court.
25se. Western Union Telegraph Company
VS.. Henley. Lawrence c. e. Reversed.
Black, il. In an action against a tele-
graph company for damages on account or
It's failure to properly transmit a Geographic
message on Sunday the burden is on the
plaintiff to state the facts establishing the
| validity of the contract; it is essential Tor
| the avoidance of the statutory inhibition
Of such a contract made on sunday tnat
there existed a reasonaDle necessity Tor
| Telegraph company must hav notice of that
| necessity. 3 The Office of a p.eadinS Is 10
show what was or was not done, SO tnat'
looking to the acts and OMISSIONS std1eo'
the court may, by applying the law thereto.
determine whether a cause OF action Oh
a defense has been shown, and not 10 snow
the supposed legal force and enecS- D. IN
ascertaining the damages TO the plalhu!r
in an action for delay In transmitting MS
telegraphie dispatch they sh brnscb D Of i6n
contract, or such as may reasonably De
supposed to have been in or
both parties at the time the! naoe tnee
contract as to the propaDle result VI d
breach OF 1t.
Superior Court.
Room IL. l.. McMaster. Judge.
Personal Property Saving and Loan AS
| ISOLATION VS.. Harry Christian. Evidence
heard and taken under advisement.
Bartholomew Brooks VS.. Damai DE voss;
mechanics lien. Finding and 1udgment LOT
plaintiff against defendant for slil.a.
Room 2~James NJ. feathers, Judge.
II. C. Bradbrick ct al. VS.. John w. Oliver
ct al. On trial by jury.
Frank w. Flanner ct al. vs.. Narclssa
Drummond ct al. Dismissed and costs paid'
Room 2-vinson Carter. Judge.
Richard Tally VS.. Citizens Street-railroad
Company; damages. Plaintiff defaulted.
Judgment against plaintiff for costs.
Emil Wulschner ct al. VS.. James Moore:
| replevin. Jury instructed TO nnd for plalntlH
and assessed damage at % cents.
David ID. Donohue VS.. Frank "A; Beioen-
meister; malicious prosecution. Judgment
on verdict for $50 and costs.
Mary +. Campton VS.. Robert r.. smith;
note. Jury returned verdict for plaintiff for
$231.72.
Circuit Court.
Henry Clay Allen, Judge
John O'Malley VS.. Carrie Finn. Cause dis
missed by plaintiff. Costs paid.
| William S. Moslander and oliver Dillon
VS.. Albert Hiatt and Cyrus j. Clark, sheriff
of Marion county. Motion for restraining
| order submitted TO court and denied
New Suits Filed.
Magdalena Maus. jr.. VS.. Anna Held et
al. foreclosure of mortgage. Superior Court
Room 2
Peter Boone VS.. Indianapolis street-rail.
way Company; damages. Superior Court
Lefty C. clune VS.. simeon Henderson,: to
modify decree. Superior Court; Room 3