The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1901-05-30

yond dispute, he shah cave his DAY IN
court. = The presence in court OF the
person whose sanity IS in issue is a Juris-
dictional necessity. ). When one who has
been declared OF unSOund mind IN his abb
sence, without notice. and after the eXpira-
ton of the time for appeal or review,
brings his action in the same court, asking
that the invalldity OF the Judgment be de-
clared, he does not make a collateral, but a
direct attack upon the proceedings.
379S. Bowlley vs. Kline. Shelby G. c.
Affirmed. Wiley, il. Before an assignee
of a building and loan mortgage can tore
close the same IL must appear that an
order 10 make the assignment was first
obtained from the Circuit Court pursuant
to Section 1863 Burns, lSsO. notwithstand-
ing the fact that the mortgage was SX-
ecuted before the act Of 1884 became a
law. ?. \ building association can ne
sotiate its bonds and mortgages by IN
dorsement only upon condition That IL
first obtain an order Of the Circuit Court.
1918. Stanbaugh VS.. S~tanbaugh.. Hamil-
ton c. =. Affirmed Robinson, when
a married man buys a tract of real es-
tate upon title bond. and after the pur-
chase price is paid in full his wife IN
duces the seller TO convey the same 10
her in her own name. whereupon she holds
the same for several years with full know
ledge of the facts on the part OF the nus
band, and afterwards the wife procures
a divorce from the husband. in which
proceeding no alimony was asked and none
given, held that the husband. after the
granting of the divorce, in a new action
could not divest the wife of the title to
the real estate.
1886. Oil Co. VS.. State. Blackford c.
G.. Reversed. Robinson. jim an action
by the State seeking TO convict the de-
PENDANT of obstructing a highway. when
the record fails to show an arraignment
or a waiver of il, or that a paper was
entered by the accused, the judgment OF
conviction will be reversed.
3S6S. Smith VS.. Holtz. Nanderburg c. c.
Dismissed. Wiley. 1.-THE assignment of
errors must contain the full names of all
1903. Seisler VS.. Smith. Wabash @. c. AT
frmed. Henley, 1.-THE record of the COM
missioners' court establishing a highway
in certain years over a certain course is
only evidence that a highway existed lit
that time.
37sa. Harrell VS.. c., c., c. & St. L. Rail-
way Co. Benton c. &. Affirmed. Henley, j.
A railroad company is not liable for dam
ages sustained by a person at a crossing
by being struck with a hand car when 1t is
business hours in going upon their own
private business.
1857. Bartlett VS.. Williamc. Marshall c.
c. Affirmed. Robinson, III. A married
woman cannot enter into an executory con-
tract for the sale of her land ualess her
husband join in such contract. - In a COM
plant seeking SPECIFIC performance OF a
should be so described that II can be To-
Gated without extrinsic proof.
376S. Jones VS.. Bradford. Grant c. C.. At
frmed. Black, g. when the evidence is
not in the record by a proper bill of excep-
tions no question depending upon the evil
denre is presented.
1867 Turner vs. Turner. Shelby c. G. At
hrmed. Comstock, il. A bill of excep-
tons must be filed within the time al
lowed by the court TO properly present the
divorce brought by the wife il is not prop
er TO admit in evidence on behalf of de-
PENDANT a letter written by him TO his
wife after the action had been COM
menced for the purpose of showing his in
tention upon the question of abandonment.
3. Abandonment of one person by another is
a matter of intention which may be deter
mined by the actions and statements of
the party.
3s7s Wagner VS.. Carskadon. Marion s. c.
Affirmed Wiley. J.-Where a wife was not
made a party to a proceeding in partition
of real estate in which her husband had
an interest, and she survives him. and such
interest of the husband is Invested by
judi cial sale on such proceedings she does
not retain any interest or title in the real
estate.
1910. Bentley VS.. Goodwine. Clark c. c.
Reversed. Roby, il. Under acts 1873,
special session, p. 160, property held by
married women and acquired by gift can
not te made liable for the debt of another
by mortgage. 2. 1t will be presumed con-
clusll ely that a witness means what he
says in his testimony. 3. Where a party is
given one tract of real estate and it is sub
sequently exchanged for another she ac-
quires the latter by purchase.
3745. Covert VS.. Bray. Vanderburg S. c.
Reversed. Comstock, il. When the first
judgment lien holder has the payment OF
his judgment replevied by a Junior judg-
ment lien holder the first lien holder is pro-
tected in addition to the value of the prop
erty and is not entitled to enjoin the sec
ond lien holder from selling the property
upon his own judgment. 2. The ground upon
which the right to intunctive relief rests is
that the party seeking it is about to suffer
or is threatened with great injury for
which there is no legal remedy.
319. Redkey, etc, Co. VS.. Orr. Jay c. c.
Affirmed. Henley, il. Injunction is the
proper remedy where a proposed unau-
thorized action of a corporation or its di-
rectors will prejudice the rights of a stock
holder. 2 After the payment of the par
holders cannot authorize the company to
assess the stock an agreed amount.
1858. Springer VS.. Foster. Jasper c. C.. At
frmed. Black, c. il. Where one dis
charges a lien which rests alike upon the
property of himself and others, he is en-
title to contribution from those whose prop
erty has been relieved from the common
burden, and in an action to enforce such
contribution and subrogation the complaint
should show that plaintiff had paid the en-
tire debt. 2. A surety or a tenant in COM
mon is not entitled to be subrogated to the
creditors rights IN the security held by
him Until the whole debt has been paid. 3. A
purchaser of real estate who assumes the
payment of a prior mortgage is person.
ally liable for the payment of the debt Sc
cured thereby, while a purchaser who boys
merely subject TO such mortgage does not
assume a personal liability; but in each OF
such cases the purchaser takes the land
charged with the payment of the debt. 4.
Inc right OF SuD-OSdtlON does not exist
in favor of one who has paid a mortgage
debt for which he himself was not peT-
sonally and primarily liable. whose duty
it was TO pay the debt before all others
1862. Homer VS.. Clark. lagrange G. c.
Affirmed. Black, c. J.-Where a person has
been placed in possession of land under
and pursuant to a valid contract of pur-
chase and has made lasting and valuable
improvements thereon and has fully per
formed her part of the contract she is the
equitable owner thereof and may compel
a performance of the contract by the other
party.
Minutes
1906. Nancy ]. Collyer, administrative,
VS.. Benjamin III. Cook, administrator. Han
cock c. C. Appellants reply brief.
1913. Kingsn < Co. I'D VS. William
r.. Hawley ct al. Appellants brief tS).
SUPERIOR COURT.
Room John L. McMaster, Judge.
Henry A. Lemon, by next friend, We.
Indianapolis Union Ry. Co. ct al; dam
ages. Plaintiff dismisses cause as to de-
PENDANT, city Of indianapolis. Finding and
judgment for plaintiff against defendant,
Indianapolis Union Ry. Co., for $500 and
costs.
Byron A. Weller VS.. indianapolis Light
and Power Co; damages. Jury returned
verdict for defendant.
Room 3-Vinson Carter. Judge.
George l.. Paetz VS.. Mary Ann Johnston
ct al; TO quiet title. Finding for plaintiff