The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1901-06-22

across one of the streets of the city,
plaintiff was thrown from the wagon and
injured by reason Of the alleged defective
condition of the street. In an action
for damages for such injuries, 1t is held
that the evidence is sufficient to sustain
the verdict of the jury, to the erect;
u That the street was defective ana not
in good repair for public use; ~ that de-
PENDANTS were chargeable with actionable
negligence with respect to such condi-
ton; (3) that plaintiff was not guilty OF
contrlbutory negligence, and "a that the
defective condition Of the street was the
proXimate cause of her injury.
2. Actual notice to officers of a mu--
nicipality of the defective condition of
its streets, where such officers are clothed
with general powers and duties with ref
erence to the supervision and control of
the corporate affairs or are clothed with
specific duties as to the care Of the
streets, is notice to and binding upon
the municipality.
5 Whether plaintiff was chargeable
with contributory negligence, because Of
the defective conditions of the vehicle in
which she was riding, was, under the
evidence in the case, question Of fact
for the jury.
i. 1t does not follow that because sew
eral persons are occupants of the same
vehicle that they are engaged in joint
enterprise within the meaning of the
law of negligence. In order to constitute
a joint enterprise on the part Of such
persons, within the purview of such law,
there should exist between them point
or community of interest in the objects
of the enterprise, and an equal right to
direct and control. the movements and
conduct of eachs other with respect
within this rule, plaintiff was not en-
gagged in joint enterprise with the
driver of the vehicle in which she was
riding at the time of her injury, and that
of H.
putable to her.
5. A railway company may enter upon
public street or highway and appro-
pirate it for railroad purposes by laying
its track thereon, when authorized to do
so by law, but such use must not inter-
fere with the public travel, and the COM
pany must in such cases restore the
street to it's ordinary condition and main
tain the railway crossing in reasonably
safe condition for public use. And this
duty and obligation is a continuing one
and exists independently OF any obli-
cation on the part of the municipality.
Order affirmed. Brown, J.
Anna Adams, respondent. VS. City Of
Thief River Falls and Great Northern
Railway Company, DEFENDANTS; City Of
Thief River Falls, appellants.
Syllabus1. Numerous assignments Of
error on this appeal have been determin-
City of Thief River Falls and Great
Northern Railway Company, presented
at the same time and upon the same
facts which rule the disposition of this
case in those respects.
2. Plaintiff was permitted to illustrate
her power to use her arm, claimed TO
have been permanently injured in an ac-
cident, by movements thereof at the trial
and before the jury. Held, that such ex-
periments were permissible and within
the proper exercise of the discretion of
the trial court.
8. At the close of the testimony the
court, upon motion, dismissed the action
against the Great Northern Railway COM
pany, which is assigned as error. Held,
that in the absence of any motion for a
new trial in which the Great Northern
Railway company was a party and given
hearing, as we'll as the failure to serve
notice of appeal on such company, that
such defendant is not before the courtSon
this appeal.
4. The claim by defendant against
whom recovery was had that the dam
ages were excessive is not before us fo-
review, and the reason that the same was
not assigned by appellant as error. Or
der affirmed. Lovely, J.
Charles ]. Swanson, appellant, VS.. John
b. AndruS. respondent.
Syllabus-The plaintiff offered to con-
struct a certain definite part of O. build
ing for the defendant as per plan for a
ditional partitions for 10 cents per square
foot and any additional floors for IS cents
per square foot The defendant accept
then repudiated the contract and refused
to permit the plaintiff to perform on his
part. After this breach the defendant
changed his plans, necessitating addi-
tlonal floors and partitions in the build
ing and let the contract for it's erection
to other parties. The plaintiff brought
this action to recover the money expend-
ed in preparing to execute his contract,
for loss of profits which he could have
made on the work specifically stated III
his offer and for the loss of profits which
ne could have made on the work of con-
tons placed in the building as it was
finally constructed. Held:
l. He was not entitled to recover any,
thing on the last claim stated, as it was
optional with the defendant whether he
would have any additional floors or par
titions constructed.
He was entitled to recover on his
other claims
his profits until they were determined by
the verdict. Order affirmed.
Start, ].
c. L: Todd, respondent, VS.. H. S. Weed,
l. The failure of a person claiming til
tie to land by adverse possession to paw
the taxes thereon during the time of his
possession, where the land is taxed separ-
ately from other lands, is strong and
forcIble evidence, though not conclusive
that his possession was not under claim
of title, nor with an intent to claim adj
versely to the true owner.
z Conduct and admissions of a person
claiming title to land by adverse possess
sion, occurring subsequent to the expira-
ton OF the statutory period of fifteen
years, are competent evidence upon and
as tending to explain and characterize
the antecedent possession.
3. Possession examined and held suf-
hc1ent to sustain the findings of the
trial court. Order affirmed
Brown, j.
w E. Martin, appellant, VS.. T. E. Walk
er, respondent
The evidence sustains the finding of the
trial court to the effect that the nIain
tiff neither performed nor rendered per-
torrance of the conditions of an option
contract for the purchase of land within
tine life OF the contract. Order affirmed.
Start, G. j.
United States Investment Corporation.
Limited, respondent, VS.. Christian II.
Ulr1ckSon, appellant
T. U. was the owner of a farm which
was 1ncumbered with mortgages and
mems TO the extent of nearly half ire
value He entered into an agreement
the premises in consideration of the sons
executing the necessary mortgage to
raise money sufficient to pay off the liens
Inc property was accordingly conveyed
TO the son who executed the necessary
note and mortgage, through the repre-
sensations of the father. in the sons
presence, that he was of legal age. The
money received upon the mortgage was
used in clearing the land from it's in
cumlbrances.
Upon arriving at lawful age, the SON
served notice upon the mortgage. and
MS assignee disaffirming the contract
IN an action to foreclose the mortgage.
held. that under such circumstances the
minor stood as the representative of the
father for the purposes of executing fhe
mortgage, and he could not plead his
infancy Or, if he represented himself
to the mortgage as owner of the No.