The Washington times., 1901-10-26
LATE LEGAL DECISIONS.


LATE LEGAL DECISIONS.
Where an officer arrests tile wrong per.
son. on the mistaken Identification OF an.
other. the Supreme Court of California.
In the case of Miller vs.. Fano t6s Psc.
Rep. 1ss), holds that the officer. and
not the person who Identified the party
arrested, is liable for an action for false
imprisonment. The defendant was arrest
ed by police officer on charge Of hav-
ing sold a railroad ticket not belonging TO
him, but to broker. The broker could
not positively identify the man. but stated
that he Iooked like the man who had sold
the ticket to him. The prisoner told the
officer his name and address, and that
he was not the man wanted, and referred
TO friend residing in the city and well
known to the officer. The officer, how
ever, failed to make any enquiries, and
placed the prisoner I'm Jail. The prisoner
sued the officer and broker for false i'm
prisonment. and obtained a Judgment OF
$500. On appeal the SupreIee Court sus-
tained the judgment as to the officer. but
reversed 1t as to the broker. The court
held that the broker was not liable for
the reason that he had not directed the
officer to make the arrest, but merely
made an innocent mistake in the identih-
cation. In sustaining the judgment against
the officer the court said: An officer of
the law has duty to perform in making
an arrest. He also o.Ses a duty TO the
public and to the party about TO be ar
rested He should use prudence and dill
gence to find out IL the party arrested is
the party described in the warrant. II In
his zeal he willfully or carelessly arrests
an innocent party he should be made to
suner the consequences.
|
Spooning, hugging. and kissing in a
public park In plain view of passers-by
is not a misdemeanor an offence or a
crime, but is allowable under the stat
utes and ~rdinances," holds Judge Sill
vara, of Des Moines. Iowa
gift of his whole estate by husband
just before his death. with the intent TO
defeat the widows right to distributive
share therein. Is fraudulent and void.
holds Judge Hawkins. of the Orphans
Court. Allegheny County. Pa. and even
in the absence of fraud, an attempt to
dispose of his estate, so as to defeat the
widows Interest therein, by donatio causa
mortis, is inconsistent with the statute
of wills.
A lawyer employed by a railroad COM
pany on yearly salary, payable monthly,
is not a laborer or employe emitting him
Judge Caldwell in the case OF Latta VS..
Lonsdale u07 Fed. Rep, 5S5). 1T Is gem
orally believed" said the judge, that
corporation lawyers have the opportunity
and are quite able and capable of taking
care of themselves when their clients fail,
and statutes of the character quoted are
not enacted in their interest, but for the
protection of wage earners proper. who
are laymen, and who have neither the po-
sftion nor the opportunity nor the capaci-
" TO obtain nAVmpnt security for their
services, which the lawyer Of the cor
poration has"
police Justice has power to Issue
search warrant to recover stolen prop
erty located outside of the city limits, but
which was stolen within the city, and
over which crime he has exclusive juris-
diction. holds the Supreme Court of Mich
igan, in the case of O'Meara VS.. Merritt
Is ID. l. N, 630)-
A conductor of a train cannot assault
a passenger in retaliation for an assault
committed upon him, or for abusive
words, or in revenge or punishment I'M
der any circumstances, without rendering
the carrier liable for damages, holds the
Supreme Court of Alabama. In the case
of Birmingham Railway, etc, CO., VS..
Baird go So. Rep. 1860. Il Il conductor
assaults a passenger otherwise than I'M
Il
passenger from battery, or in rightfully
ejecting the passenger, who. by his con-
duct to other passengers or otherwise has
forfeited his right to carriage, the carrier
is liable. -
Where a steamship company having ae-
commodation for and authorized to carry
only 375 steerage passengers sells tickets
to and receives AS such passengers, and
by reason of such overcrowding the pas
sengers are delayed and injured, Judge
Hanford, United States District Court,
hold in the case of the Valencia Clo Fed.
Rep, 221), that the company Is responsi-
BILE for such damage, since such crowilng
beyond the point at which the passengers
could be safely carried Is a breach Of the
contract to safely carry them.
Where one repudiates contractaby
which he is bound TO make certain pay
ments at certain times, Judge Thompson,
United States District Court, in the case
of Peurrung vs. Carter-Crame Company
Ql0 Fed Rep, 100. holds that the other
party is not bound to sue for damages
as for a breach, or to wait TIL all the in
stallments are due, but may bring sepa-
rate actions for installments as they De-
come due.
Under an Indictment for selling spiritu-
Gus liquors without license and contrary
to law, the Supreme Court of Alabama, in
the case of Bonds vs. State go So Rep,
42O. holds that a conviction cannot be had
against defendant where the evidence
shows that he had no interest in the
liquor sold, nor in the money paid for IL.
but acted orly as the agent or friend OF
the purchaser in procuring the liquor.
A mere business or other conversation
by a juror with another person, entirely
foreign to the case on trial. in the pres
ence and hearing of the sheriff and other
jurors, although reprehensible. because
II shows lack of respect for the law on
the part OF both officer and juror particf-
pating in IL. and is unseeming and re-
proachable in the administration of jus
lice will not render verdict void. tSu-
preme Court of Aps>sls of West Virginia
In State VS.. Colts. SO S E. Rep, 6oo)
Greater diligence is required by travel
ers crossing highways on which are street
cars than upon those where there are
none. holds the Supreme Court of Michi-
gan, in the case of Merritt VS.. Foote IS
ID. L. N. 61s), and there is reciprocal
duty on the part of the railway, through
the motorman, to watch and keep the car
under control as far as practicable.
The inability of Judge Dunno, of the Cir
cult Court of Cook County. ILL.,. to fix the
value of a set of false teeth saved the de-
fendant, in a charge of larceny, from
being convicted of grand larceny, and i'm
prisoned in the pcnitentiary. The defend
ant was accused of havisg stolen SET
of secondhand false teeth, purse -a@p- I
a railroad ticket. In order for him to be
convicted of grand larceny it was neces-
sary for the aggregate value OF the stolen
articles to exceed SIS. The purse and the
railroad ticket did not equal that amount,
and as the court was unable to put
price on false teeth that had been used.
the defendant escaped a conviction OF
grand Iarceny. and was found guilty OF