The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1901-10-12

sufficient cause of action being disclosed.
and a correct result is reached, a JudSmen
will not be reversed because of such ruling.
T. The bill of exceptions containing the
evidence should state that it contains all
the 1ezs evidence given in the cause.
c Transferred to Appellate Court.
1881. Wolf VS.. Shelton. Howard S. c.
transferred to Appellate Court.
railway Company. Marion S. c. Trans
ferred to Appellate Court.
1888 Wink vs., Work. Marshall c. c.
transferred 10 Appellate Court.
Minute
1865. Moses Gonser ct al. VS.. State ex
rel. David Haskins, trustee. ct al. Steu-
ben g {. Brief Of Appellee Haskins, trus-
tee 60
APPELLATE COURT.
1871. Jameson VS.. Dilley. Cass c. c.
Afhrmed. Black. c. ito render "A convey
ance subject to attack by creditors Of the
grantor, where ii is shown that it was made
with intent TO defraud them. ii will not be
necessary TO show that there was no con
sheraton OF value whatever. but it will
avail the attacking creditors to show that
the consideration. though valuable, was so
inadequate that the conveyance, if per-
mitted 10 stand in full force, will mani
testify result In appreciate injury to the
credltors, and that they will be appreciably
benefited by subjecting il to the payment
OF their claims without material injury TO
the innocent purchaser.
1911. Fenstenmaker VS.. Holman. Grant
Z Z. Reversed. Henly, il The inten-
ton OF a ~testator is a guide TO courts i'm
constituting wills only when. by following il.
the established rules OF law will not be in
terfered with. ?. Where a testator pro-
vides by will as follows: Il further direct
and will that my beloved wife. --
snail nave all my real and personal prop
erty thet L may be possessed of at the time
OF my death (she selling so much of my
personal property as she may think neces-
sary to be applied on the payment Of my
debts)," and further providing that at the
death or said wife the property should be
divided among certain named heirs, il is
held that the wife took an absolute estate
in fee simple.
1884. Pearson VS.. Wood. Hendricks c. C..
Affirmed. Comstock, j. The mere fact that
there appears 10 be on record mortgages
barred by the statute of limitations will
grantor when the grantee has in no wise
been disturbed In his possession. The fact
that a loan OF money upon the property on
account of the title was refused is imma-
teTial.
1865. Curryer VS.. Oliver. Clay C. c. Man
believes that a new trial should be granted
a reversal Will be so modified and a new
trial ordered.
1857. Moore VS.. c., I. & L. Ry. Co. Boone
c. c. Petition for rehearing overruled.
300. Craig VS.. Bennett. Marshall c. c.
2272. c., c., C. & st. L. Ry. Co. VS.. State
of Indiana. Boone c. c. Order TO substi-
tute record and papers.
2Se. Ledbetter VS.. State of Indiana.
bOOlt - - same
1908. Magic Packing Company VS.. Stone.
ETC.. Company. Delaware c. c. Petition
to file brief overruled.
4l7O. Citizens Street-railroad Company VS..
jolly. Hamilton c. c. Thirty days addi-
tional given in which TO file brief.
Minutes
1908. Magic Packing COMPANY ct al. VS..
the Stone-Ordean-Wells Company. Della
ware c. c. Appellee's motion, notice and
affidavit for leave to appear and file brief,
etc. Petition overruled.
no 81 II -. -sff0-. L G;A
son ct al. Allen c. c. Appellants brief 81
ala. Kirkpatrick Construction Company
VS.. Central Electric Company ct al. Han
cock G.. {. Appellants brief @)
4101. Thomas f. Ellison VS.. Herbert N.
Towne. Allen c. c. Appellants brief @)
New Case
NJ ass Rob B; & O. s; vi w; R; R; Co R VS.; Edward
s1gnment OF errors. In term. Bond.
SUPERIOR COURT.
Room FLAMES NJ. feathers, Judge.
Michael O'Connor VS.. William Kremiller;
note. Defendant defaulted; submitted to
court; evidence heard. Finding and judg-
ment against defendant for s65.79, without
w. J. Hubbard VS.. Carl C. Roth ct al:
foreclosure. Defendant defaulted; sub
and judgment against defendant Roth for
S293.42. without relief and costs. Foreclosure
and sale ordered.
Room 3.-Vinson Carter. Judge.
James ID. Richardson VS.. Louis kOmin-
sky; mechanics lien. Finding for de-
PENDANT. Judgment against plaintiff for
costs.
Arthur n. Dwyer vs.. City of indianapolis
ct al; injunction. Dismissed and costs
paid.
CIRCUIT COURT.
Henry Clay Allen, Judge.
Hannah r.. Ridpath VS.. Supreme Lodge
ment cause sent to Marion Superior Court.
State ex rel. Emanuel l.. Fisher. trustee.
VS.. Harry b. Smith, auditor of Marion
misses and by leave of court withdraws
papers. Costs paid.
Mary Hines vs.. Edward B~ohannon's
Estate; claim. Submitted to court. Evil
oence heard in part.
Mary p. Smith VS.. Emma L. Ratliffe ct
al; foreclosure. Defendant Milton S. Myers
defaulted. Submitted to court. Finding
for plaintiff against defendants Myers and
Emma L.. Ratliffe for s~l,746.S5. without re-
lief and costs. Decree of foreclosure.
phys Estate; claim. Stricken from docket.
Allowed on appearance docket.
Otto A Dippel VS.: Mary c. Dippel: di-
court. Finding for defendant. Plaintiff
ordered TO pay IS a month for support of
child TO defendant. provided he has use of
barn.
Frankie Beaver VS.. Martha E. Arnold;
Islander Dismissed by plaintiff. Costs paid.
NEW SUITS FILED.
Daniel c.. Robinson ct al. VS.. Emma L.
Ratlif ct al; mortgage foreclosure. Cir
cult Court. |
The Marion Paper Company VS.. Schroc-
ter Manufacturing Company; attachment
and garnishment. Superior Court. Room 1.
In re, Mary j. Stotts. G feeble-minded
person: petition TO admit relatrix 10 In
diana School for Predetermined.
In re, Minnie Mohler, a feeble-minded
person; petition TO admit relatrix to In
diana School for Predetermined.
Anton c. Brinkman VS.. indianapolis
Street-railway Company; damages. De-
mand. $4,000. Superior Court. Room 3.
Laura Il. Cress ct al. vs. Rebecca Collins
ct al; partition. Circuit Court.
Harry b. Burnet Ell al. vs.. Josephine
Strofo ct al; mechanics lien. Circuit
Court. |
Lena s. d. Russow by August G. Russow,
her next friend, VS.. Thomas L. Cooney ct
al; damages. Demand, 5000. Superior
Court; Room 8.
Alice Ennis VS.. Samuel Edward Ennis; |
divorce. Superior Court, Room 1.
August {. RussOw VS.. Thomas E. Cooney
ct al; damages. Demand, 5000. Superior
Court, Room 2.
RECENT LEGAL OPINIONS.