The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1901-05-08

court at the time 2. Where property is de-
stroyed by fire on account OF the negli-
gence OF the defendant, the rule for the
measure of damages If there Is right or
recovery. is the difference. If any. between
the fair market value of the land burned
over. Immediately before the nre ana It's
fair market value Immediately Afterwards;
g. But where personal property Is injured
partially, the amount of damages recoN-
cradle Is the extent OF the injury 10 the
property.
1sis7. Makever VS.. Martindaie. Jasper c.
G Affirmed. Hadley. il. In proceeding
TO establish a ditch under Section 5eoo,
Burns, 1894. ct seq, a naked motion py a
person Directing 10 the construction of the
ditch. to strike out the viewers report has
no legal efficacy. 2. person who assails
the regularity of the proceedings to estap-
lish ditch must file his undertaking Tor
costs before his remonstrance will be con-
sidered. 3. Appeals from boards OF COM
missioners are tried in the Circuit Court de
novo, upon the issues formed in the lower
1914 Board of Commissioners VS.. State
ex rel Underwood. Monroe c. c. Affirmed.
Jordan. J.-Where highway is sought TO
be established under the amendatory act
of 1895 acts 1895, Page 1s3) and a jury has
assessed to property owner his dam
ages. the latter can not. by mandamus,
compel the Board of Commissioners and
county auditor TO issue a warrant upon the
treasurer for the sum allowed such prop
erty owner until IL is shown that there Is
money In the county treasury liable for the
payment of the warrant which such party
desires issued. 2. The object of a special
finding lie 10 find facts. and no omission OF
, fa g. can An be supplied by intendment r,
s. c. Transferred TO Appellate Court.
1925 p, G. c. st. L. Railway Com,
pany VS.. Iddings. Lake c. c. Transferred
to Appellate Court.
1920 Trandt VS.. Hagerman. Posey c. G.
Transferred to Appellate Court.
1922 Bartmess VS.. Holiday. Tippecanoe.
8. c. Transferred to Appellate Court.
19233 Manufacturing COmndnY r1nr-
mon. Porter c. c. Transferred to Appellate
Court.
Transferred to Appellate Court.
1927. Oster VS.. Brae Benton c. c. Trans
ferred to Appellate Court.
1929 Burford vs. National Bank Tippe-
canoe c. c. Transferred to Appellate
1924. James VS. Board of Commissioners.
Henry c. c. Transferred TO Appellate
1922 Rooms VS.. Manifold Henry c. c.
Transferred to Appellate Court.
1924 Case VS.. Nelson. Csss c. c.. Trans
ferred to Appellate Court
1921. Sohl Evans. Hamilton c. G.
Transferred to Appellate Court.
ls24S. Barnett We. Barnett. Jay c. c.
Transferred rams to Appellate Court
roe c. c. Transferred to Appellate Court.
1921, Scofeld vs. Myers. Marion S. C.
TT raass Tes to Appellate Court: -
Transferred to Appellate Court.
1920. Strunk VS.. Pritchett. Clark c. C.
Transferred to Appellate Court.
Transferred to Appellate Court. y
1923. OBrien VS. Bush. Madison 8. G.
Transferred to Appellate Court.
z ls2,s; Case etc; Company vs. Millikan
Court
Minutes
1856 Western Union Telegraph Com.
pany vs.. Howard Ferguson Briefs in W.
Ia A
1850 Frank L. Monteith W" VS.. Kokomc
Wood Enameling Company. Appellants
petition for extension OF time: etc
1852 Minnie Leeds We. Calvert II. De-
frees. Appellants brief 81
1858 Amelia Leeds ct al. VS.. Calvert H
Defrees. Appellants brief g.
1854 William Blnks ct al VS.. Calvert H
Defrees. Appellants brief 80
APPELLATE COURT.
374s. Pitts. etc, Railway Company VS.
Noftsker. Monroe G. c. Affirmed. Robin
son, il. When a cause has once beer
appealed and remanded for a new tria
am an, TO the compliant plant which a. az
pleading leaves the complaint subject Il
the law as announced on the former ap
peal. 2 The intent OF the owner to devot'
his land TO public use is an essential ele
ment OF dedication, without which Their,
can be no dedication. 3. This court canno
weigh the evidence in cause.
firmed. Wiley, il. Ordinarily the title Il
real estate is not in issue in proceedings
for partition, although the title may b'
action in partition where the title is no
in question new trial as OF right car
not be granted. 3. In an action In partition
where there is no question of title raiset
by the complaint, and the answer filed Il
that of general denial the question OF titl'
is not raised. 4. A decree In partition doe
not create any new title.
$3.50 Barnett VS.. Bryce. Furnace Com
pany. Fulton c. c. Affirmed. Black. jill
an action to annul a written contract tn
material parts of the contract must b.
pleaded in the complaint.
1885, Curryer vs. Oliver. Clay c. G. Re
versed. Roby, il. In proceeding brough
by virtue of the provisions OF Section 535l
Homer. 1897. motion for judgment on tn
evidence Is equivalent TO a demurrer L
the evidence and the same rules of con
struction apply. 2. The law presumes tina
the county clerk has done his duty.
c. c. Affirmed. Henly. c. J.-Where a. de
murrer reads as follows: THE plaintiff de
murs to the second, third and fourtl
neither of said paragraphs state fact
sufficient to constitute cause of de
Tense" it is joint demurrer to the en-
tire complaint.
Vanderburgh s. G. Petition TO advance
overruled.
3sis. Mcdonald VS.. State. Pike c. c. Dis
missed under Rule 81.
1888. Littell VS.. Burns. Clark Z. Z. Fupli
cation ordered
Minutes
1926 Andrew Il. Fisher VS.. Clem feak
Notice of motion 10 dismiss for May IL.
1855. Milton Shirk, executor, etc, VS.
John Lingeman. Notice, etc.
1894. Frank b. Felt, trustee, VS. East chi
caeo Iron and Steel Company ct al NO
tice of motion for oral argument.
s344. f. Reynolds Muller VS.. the stat
Life Insurance Company. Appellants ad
ditional authorities.
New Appellate Court Suit
ss71. Eliza beth A. Prall and Jesse NJ
Prall VS.. Thomas c. Day. Clark G. c
Record Assignment Of errors. Notice.
Oral Arguments
1884. Union Mutual Building and Loa,
Association VS. Christina Aichele ct al
"Wednesday, May e. 10 o'clock a. m.
3725. Postal Telegraph Cable Compan,
of Indiana vs. c., I. & L. Railway Com
pany et al Oct 10 1901. at 10 a.
37Ss. P. c. C. a st. l.. Railway Com
pany VS.. Carl Greb. Oct. s. 1901. 10 a. m.
SUPERIOR COURT.
Room John l.. McMaster, Judge.
Eetna Saving and Loan Association VS.
Mary Zook ct al; foreclosure. Dismissed
and costs paid.
Mary Heney vs.. Indianapolis Street-rail
way Company ct al: damages. Plaintiff
dismisses Judgment against plaintiff fol
costs.
Theodore p. Davis. Special Judge.