The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1900-06-07

notice that the bill of exceptions signed in
October was of the September term and
not of the March term of court.
1851. Yeoman VS.. Shaeffer. Jasper G. G..
Affirmed. Bowling. il. In proceeding
under Section $685. ct sea-, Burns QSeD, the
rights of each party demonstrating must be
separately determined by the jury in their
verdict. 2. When the certificate OF the
clerk only that the transcript contains true
and complete copies of all the papers in
PRODUCED and entries made in the cause
does not comply with the requirements of
Section 662. Burns, 1894 3. Upon a joint
assignment OF error one of several appel
lants cannot avail himself of errors which
are not common to all his co-appellants,
but affect him alone, nor can parties who
jointly assign error take advantage OF
error which affect them severally.
1875. T. II. & l.. Ry. Co. VS.. ST. j.. s.,
ETC.. r. r. Co. ST. Joseph c. C. Dismissed.
Baker, c. il. The third subdivision of
Section GAG. Revised Statutes, 1881, Section
65s, Burns. 1894. refers to temporary injunc-
lions and applies neither to perpetual in
functions nor TO temporary restraining or
ders- 2. In determining the sense and scope
OF various orders made by the court II is
not permissible to isolate particular words
and take their abstract meaning as decis-
i've, but the full context of the order should
be examined in connection with the subject
matter of the questions that were presented
to the court to act upon g. An interlocu-
tory order denying temporary injunction
and vacating a temporary restraining order
Heretofore issued is unappealable-
1898. Christ VS.. Wayne, etc., Association
Huntington G. G.. Affirmed Monks, j.
Where one of several appellants made de-
fault in the lower court and afterwards
join In error on appeal, which error is joint
with all appellants, such joint assignment
is insufficient as to each of them
1913. Town of New Castle VS.. l.. E. &
w. r. r. Co. Hancock c. c. Affirmed
Baker, c. il The control of streets is
in the Legislature primarily, but such con-
troll has by the Legislature been delegated
to municipalities. 2 The Legislature may
grant railroad companies the right to lay
their tracks longitudinally upon the streets
of a municipality without its consent or
over its objection. 3. Open, notorious ex-
elusive. continuous and adverse occupation
of street by a railroad for a period of
more than thirty years gives the company
the right to occupy such street.
1892 Shattuck VS.. Shattuck. Clay c. G..
Dismissed.
1SSO7. Carpenter VS.. Schoeffer. Steuben
c. c. Motion to reinstate overruled.
Montgomery C. c. Petition for rehearing
overruled.
1906. Wood VS. ex REL Seller. st. Joseph
c. C. Petition for rehearing overruled.
1917. Mark VS.. North. Delaware c. c.
1921. State VS.. Wilson. Boone c. c. Pc
tition for leave to assign cross errors re-
fused.
1890. Rosenthal VS.. Rambo. Marion S. C.
Publication ordered
1888. In re, Paskins. Marion c. c. Mo-
tion TO dismiss postponed.
1887. CASTOR VS.. Bailey. Original ac-
tion.) Petition fer writ of error to Appel
late Court refused.
1896 Harris VS.. State of Indiana. Van
derburg C. C. Petition for rehearing over
ruled.
193O9. Ray VS. Glessner. Shelby c. C.
Motion to certify opinion sustained and Pc
tition for rehearing overruled.
1869. c., 1. & l.. Ry Co: vs. Mcclure.
White C. c. Motion to dismiss overruled.
Minutes
1876. The State of Indiana ex rel. Sarah
A. Repp ct al. VS. Jabez T. Cox. Original
action for mandamus. Respondents brief.
19309.. In re. report of Frank Glessner,
George NJ Ray VS.. Glessner, clerk. Shelby
c. G.. Motion to sustain, etc.
1925. Andrew j. Woodring ct al. VS.. Sam
uel p. Brown ct al. Madison c. c. Appel
lees brief.
Sullivan ct al. Madison S. C. Appellants
brief.
1928 Samuel NJ Hutton ct al. VS.. Nelson
Cunningham ct al. Montgomery G. G. APP
pellees' brief.
APPELLATE COURT.
SIP. Hildebrand VS.. Manufacturing Com
pany- Marion c. G. Affirmed Robinson. c.
il Under Section 647. Burns's Revised
Statutes, 1894, a part OF several co-parties
may appeal and must serve notice of the
appeal upon all the other co-parties. q
The word co-parties as used in said Sec
ton means parties to the judgment ap-
peaIed from and not co-plaintiffs or CO.
defendants. 3. Where an exception to the
conclusions of law reads as follows: "To
which conclusions of law the defendant
now here-at the time excepts"-
Is joint exception.
3O44. Peterson VS.. Sternby. Adams c. C.
Petition for rehearing overruled. Wiley,
il The overruling of motion to strike
out certain special findings as 'inconsist-
ent' with the other findings when assigned
as error presents no question for review,
+ n
record should show by record entry or
certificate of the clerk that special bill
of exception was filed In open court or in
the clerks office. 3. A stencil file mark OF
the clerk upon a bill of exceptions is not
sufficient to show that the same was filed
as required by law.
1920. Indiana, ETC., Gas Company VS.. Nc
Worth Upton c. c. Affirmed Black, j.
l. 1t is a nuisance and unlawful to place
and keep or leave continuously in a public
highway. anything which either impedes
or endangers public travel. And the rule
applies to the whole width of the highway,
and not merely to worn portion of ii
commonly used for passage. 2. person
lawfully using a public highway may use
the same from fence to fence on either
side.
1922. L. S. NJ. S. Railway Company
VS.. Smith Porter c. c. Reversed on con-
fession of error.
2556. Gemmill VS.. Brown Adams c. c.
Petition for rehearing overruled.
307S. Toner VS.. State Bank. Fulton c. G..
Petition for rehearing overruled.
1902. Jones VS.. Bradford Grant c. C..
Transferred to Supreme Court
3039. Heffelfnger vs. Fulton. Wills c. c.
Petition for rehearing overruled.
3149. Dougherty VS.. Wish Marion G.. C..
Motion to dismiss postponed.
$3.50. Steel Company VS.. Daugherty. Del
aware G.. c. Motion to dismiss postponed
1861. Kuhner VS.. Kuhner. Howard C.. C..
Motion to advance overruled.
1853. Shoemaker VS.. Williamson. Wells c.
c. Transferred to Supreme Court
Minutes
1924. The Farmers Insurance Company
of Bedford, Ind, VS. John p. Borders ct al.
Daviess C. c. Appellants brief on cross
errors.
1888 State of Indiana VS.. orvilIe K.
Moore. Blackford c. G. Appellee's brief
1885. Cora Bonham ct al. VS. John p Nc
Gath, administrator. ETC., ct al Blackford
c. c. Motion for certiorari. Notice served
for June Is.
1913 State Of Indiana ex rel. Ida M. Zim-
norman ct al VS.. Andrew NJ. Chapman ct
al De Kalb c. c. Appellants reply
brief (2)
SUPERIOR COURT.
Room John l.. McMaster, Judge.
Catherine Curt vs. William Saks Com
pany; damages. Jury out.
road Company; damages. On trial by
struck jury.
Room FLAMES NJ. feathers, Judge.
Ruth Hinkle VS.. John c. Hinkle: divorce
Decree granted plaintiff. Judgment against