The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1899-04-07
A NEW TRIAL IN
THE BRUCE CASE.
important Decision by the Court Of
Appeals.
A SUIT ABOUT INSURANCE
Major Taylor Loses Because the state
Courts Lack Jurisdiction ms TO
the Mutual Reserve Fund
Life Association.
A SUIT ABOUT INSURANCE

Judge Cardwell in the Court Of Appeals
Yesterday wrote the opinion in the case
of the Southern Railway Company ~
Bruce's administrator from the Corpora
don Court OF DanVilie. L. k. Bruce "ds
killed. IL Is alleged, By toe negligence
of the company, and tho verdict anu
Judgment in the lower court were lor
the plaintiff in the sum OF @'5'". BRUTE
was a young man OF nine teen years. nc
was run over and killed by tram on
July q. 1891. The Appellate court says
after reviewing the evidence;
1--WE are Of opinion that the negligence
~ plaintiffs intcstate contributing TO ms
injury must hot only be inferred from all
he circumstances OF the case, but such
negligence Is apparent from plaih'ii
evidence: therefore. the Judgment OF tne
Corporation Court of Danville must be
reversed and annulled. tb' verdict OF the
Jury Sc, aside and the cause remanded 10
that court for new trial to be had III
accordance with this opinion.
An Insurance Case.
The most important case decided was
that OF Taylor vs.. the Mutual Reserve
poratiOn. MI, a.,
In this Gaze Major ]. NJ. Taylor, the
Plaintiff. a citizen Of virginia. pe'si"e
n member of the company which IS
mutual assessment cOmps ny, ~ M ne
company the bill alleged. subsequently
raised its assessment on the plalhtlh
nOlicv to n sum in excess OF mat stipu-
lated for the certificate Of mempership uI
motley of insurance. He. therefore, nied
a bil i'm the Law and Equity Court OF
this city, alleging that the assessIiIiien'
complained of was Illegal ana cN.ol I'm, ,,
ate and averrinC that the company ndn
threatened 10 declare his pohcy ior.eIneu
unless tho assessment complained or was
paid within a given time. And he prsayea
that the company be onlolhe1 ium
earrving out this threat, and tnat me
court determine what was reasonable
IT. comnonv dcmurred to the bill on
tho ground among others. that inc sun
ioct was not within the jurisdiction Oh
The courts or virginia, anu tnc
Tho Court OF Appeals Judge buchanan
delivering the opiniOn) affirmed me deere
of the lower court. holding that tne courts
of this state cannot exercise Visltatloilal
movers over the corporations OF anotner
State. and that any decree nn1cr'dhlns
~ exercise such powers would be nusa-
tory because the court would be WITHOUT
power or authority 10 enforce IT, -,
Tho plaintiff was represented ny MT.
" l. R0vaU and the company by MAJOR
charles 5. Strlngfellow and Judge l.. Il.
Lewis.
Summary of Decisions.
Tho following cases were decided yes
terday:
Tate - Commercial Building & Loan
Association. Circuit Court Of Lynchburg
! Reversed.
Cardwen. ].
southern Railway vs.. Bruce's admir-
Corporation Court OF Danvllle. Reversed
Buchanan. J.
n & w r. co. vs. Old Dominion bag
80
Appeal dismissed.
Tavlor VS.. Mutual Reserve Fund Life
Association. Law and Equity Court city
| OF Richmond. Affirmed.
Harrison J.
Winfroe W First National Bank %
Lexington Corporation Court city OF
Lvnchhurg Affirmed
Affirmed by Divided Court.
Tate vs. Lazarus.
Saunders vs.. Baltimore Building and
Loan Association. Circuit Court OF Hen
rico county. Appeal and Supersedeas
| Bond. 500.
Eaves vs.. Vial Chsncery Court city OF
Richmond. Appeal. Bond. slN
Yost We. Van Dyke Circuit Court Of
| Tazewen county. Appeal and super
sedeas Bond 500.
Ruffner. &c. VS. Commonwealth. Coun
~ Court Of Page county. Writ Of error
| refused
Lipscomb vs. Hardgrove. Law and
| Chancerv Court city % Richmond. Ap'
peal refused.
Slaughter vs. Smither Further argued
| by Chas V Meredith for appellant ant
| submitted.
Baker vs. Swlneford Argued by Henry
| r. Pollard Cor plaintiff and VI. NJ. Gillian
| for defendant and continued until to-
| morrow