The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1900-05-19

and no notice of his application to the
Justice for rehearing or appeal was re-
quired to be given the plaintiff, and de-
PENDANT. not being a non resident, might
have at first applied direct to the Su-
perior court for the recordari.
WILEY LASSITER vs. RAILROAD co.
Modified and affirmed.
Action to recover damages for unlawful
diversion Of water on land of plaintiff,
who claimed damages for yearly injury
for three years next preceding the bring
ing of the action and consented that all
the damage done to the land, past, pres
ent and future may be estimated and re-
covered IN t,2is action-both parties
agreeing to the awarding Of permanent
damages, but defendant insisting that its
acquisition of the easement condones the
trespass; Held that defendants conten-
ton cannot be sustained. and that the
judgment of the court below must be
amended so as to allow the plaintiff the
sum awarded by the verdict for damages
to crops, in addition to that found for
permanent damage.
CAPITAL PRINTING CO VS.. CITY OF
Raleigh. Reversed.
Action for damages resulting from al
legged negligence of defendant. Defen-
dant's motion to dismiss the action,
equivalent to demurrer to evidence, was
allowed; held error The evidence of
plaintiff, showing that the lower end of a
culvert was smaller than the upper end
and that defendant had knowledge and
experience of previous unusual rainfall
i'll, 1r1 but n
the improved protection to become worth
less before the rainfall which caused the
injury complained of, which improved con-
dition would have prevented the over
flow, etc, should have been submitted to
the jury upon the question Of negligence
and culpabe lability-there being room
upon the evidence in this case for differ
ent conclusions to be drawn by reasona-
bic men.
LADD VS.. LEAGUE. Reversed.
An attorney, once appearing, continues
to appear for all purposes, until the judg-
ment is satisfied, unless he retires in the
meantime by leave of the court. The
legal inference from the record in this
case is that the attorneys named repre-
scented all the defendants, and this pre-
sumption cannot be rebutted two or three
years after final judgment by an aveHment
CT the principal defendant that he had
never employed counsel. Defendant was
ccgnizant of the course of the case, in
Guiding the trial, and had all the advan-
tage and benefit of representation by
counsel.
Where an order to court below recites
that it was made by consent of all the
parties, the plaintiffs and defendants in
this case" this court is bound by the
statement. and neither party will be heard
to say that his attorney was unauthor-
lied to consent to the order (made III
this Case.)
Statements in the record proper control
these made in the case on appeal.
STATE VS.. THOMAS JONES. Affirmed.
Indictment for murder. Evidence that
prisoner went in the night time to the
house of deceased-a woman with whom
he had been having illicit intercourse and
upon whom he had gotten a child-killed
her and one of her children with an axe
set fire to the house and burned up heI
and five children, etc, is evidence OF
deliberation and generalization to go tc
the jury and to be passed on by them, in
mental incapacity rendered him incapable
of exercising delberation and premedita-
ton and in reference to which testimony
was offered by the prisoner and by the
State