The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1900-05-26
SUPREME COURT DECISIONS.
(ReporteG by JOS. T.. Seawell.)

(ReporteG by JOS. l.. Seawell)
MOREFIELD VS.. HARRIS. Affirmed.
An administrator appointed in. another
State cannot sue in this State unless an
cillary administration is taken out here
The production of a certified copy of the
judgment in the other State is sufficient
TO authorize administration here. Shields
VS.. Insurance Company. 119 N. C. $50
cited and approved.
NEAL VS.. C. G. RAILROAD COMPANY.
Affirmed.
Plaintiffs intestate was killed by a
shifting engine and, upon demurrer To
plaintiffs evidence, it was held that
the deceased was negligent in walking
upon the track in the day time on a
straight piece of road where he could
have seen defendants train for $50 yards.
although the train may have been run
ming at a greater rate of speed than was
allowed by the city ordinance. The cases
OF Meredith 1913 n. c.. GIG; Norwood. III
n. C. 236; High, 112 n. C. 1885, cited and
approved and discussion of the rule an
nounced in them and in other cases.
Spruill VS.. Insurance Co., 1870 n. c. 141 j..
upon the question of affirmative issue"
cited commented on and distinguished.
HUTCHINSON VS.. HUTCHINSON. Re-
versed.
Equity vii not decree q sale Of q
minors land where by the terms of the
devise under which he holds, it is uncer-
tain whether there will not be other
children to share in the land. The de-
wise here was--"To S. W. H., during her
life and at her death to such child or
children as she may have surviving her.
and in case any child should die
leaving child, etc, then such child or
children shall take the share of their de-
ceased parent; Held that no sale can
be decreed during the life of the devil
see.
RAPER VS.. w. e W. RAILROAD co.
New trial
Plaintiffs intestate got his foot caught
in the guard rail at point where the
railroad track crosses the public high
way, and was run over and killed by a
train, and in an action for damages for
alleged negligence on the part of the com
Tany it was held:
I. That plaintiff could not show the
manner in which the guard rail was
placed 'at the crossing Of defendant
tracks over the streets at the town of
Wilson for the purpose of showing that
the crossing at which the intestate was
killed was effectively constructed" and
this evidence was properly ruled out. It
was competent for him to show that the
crossing in question was effectively con-
structed.
So Plaintiff proposed to show by wit
ness that the crossing near his house on
the same railroad is constructed like this
one and that people have got their feet
caught in it between the main rail and
guard rail- Held competent and it was
error in the court below to exclude it,
The plaintiff offered. not simply to show
that this crossing was like another cross
ing but that this crossing was danger
Gus because another crossing of similar
construction had proved to be danger
Gus. :"
ed.
Where the collection of an insurance
policy is resisted on the ground that the
assured made false statements and with
held information which should have been
given to defendant and there being evil
Gence to support the same. the court
| IOpOlIg ltlu5tu " SUBMIT issues as 10
whether defendants agent failed by mis-
take, to give the information which it is
alleged the assured fraudulently with
held; and as to whether the agent, after
full knowledge thereof, waived the fact
that the assured had been afflicted with
dangerous diseases.
JORDAN VS.. NEWSOME New trial
feigned debt in an assignment will
rot render the deed imperative as to
other debts secured in it. Morris vs.
Pearson, 70 n. G. 253, cited and approved
One of the preferred creditors in said
deed was the mother in law of the as
signor living in his home and was, with
the exception Of one creditor, given pref
erence over all the others, and the evil
dence showed that the preferred debts will
absorb all the property of the assignOr
outside Of his exemptions; Held that the
debt of the assgnor's mother in law
having been assailed by plaintiff and de-
PENDANT having failed to show its bona
Gdes the strial judge should have in
structed the jury that the debt was
faigned
Where plaintiffs, who are named in the
deed as general creditors, have attacked
'iiC Cos oiiiiiViih 90 ltdihuiCHl, Dui uhNc
made the deed part of their complaint
the defendant assignor is not required to
show that the debts secured by the
deed or substantial part Of them, are
genuine
An allotment of homestead. without
notice to creditors, by three of the home
steader's neighbors at the request of
trustees named in the homesteader s
deed of assignment, is irregular and
void
deed of assignment, reserving the
asSignors homestead does not require
the joinder of the assignCr's wife.
TIDDY VS.. GRAVES. Reversed.
The two years allowed a remainder
man, after a life estate, within which to
redeem land sold for taxes, applies only
to sales for non payment of State and
county taxes.
After a wife's death the husband has
no curtesy in land which she has de-
vised. Walker VS.. Long, 100 n. c. $40;
Const. Art. X, Sec. g.
Admissions in the pleadings cannot
change the law arising from the facts in
the case.
WRIGHT vs.. FORT. Affirmed
Action to recover possession of land