The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1901-05-09

. liens or otherwise 5. Said statute cannot
be said TO impair the obligations OF con-
tracts because IL operates only on contracts
entered into after its enactment; i-or Is Z
invalid on the ground that IL dsVests vested
rights. 4. The Legislature has the power
TO regulate and control the priorities OF all
statutory liens which may be created AFTER
the declaration of the legislative Will, and
every contract is presumed TO be entered
into with reference TO existing laws, D The
lien of chattel mortgage where the prop
erty remains in the possession and use OF
the mortgageor or his assigns Is as mucn
creature of the statute as the priority or
payment secured to the employe for wages
1923. Carpenter VS.. Willard Library. CID
son c. c. Affirmed. Comstock. il. The
theory of an action and the relief sought
is to be determined from the general scope
Of the pleading. 2. Where an action re-
Quires an accounting and 10 restore 10
plaintiff the title and possession of real
estate ii is one OF equitable cognizance,
although il questions the soundness OF Inc
execution of the deed and alleges that he
was induced 10 execute the deed by UNDUE
influence or fraud: J. Where equity Jurls-
diction is developed ii continues throughout
the entire controversy. although the remedy
is of a kind which might be conferred by
of the complaint the legal title 10 real
estate in controversy is placed in the de-
PENDANTS a trial cannot be demanded
as matter of right. 5. Where a new triaI
was demanded as matter or rlght the
record should show that all the require
ments of the statute giving trial
were performed by the party asking it.
S7l3. Martin VS.. Martin. Jennings C c.
Affirmed per curtain. When the record
shows that correct conclusion was
reached in the trial court the Judgment
will be affirmed.
1900 Craig VS.. Bennett. Marshall c. c.
Affirmed (no opinion) per curiam.
3615. Jaeger VS.. Laing. Starke {. Z. Al
frmed (no opinion) per curtain.
3776. Harper VS.. roster. Adams Z. Z.
Affirmed (no opinion) per curtain.
/ Minutes
1885 Dina Sauer VS.. Eberhardt p.
Schenck ct al. Appellants brief 90
1887. Samuel Trittipo VS.. Albert w. Trit-
tipo. Appellants petition for leave 70
amend transcript, etc.
1850 Joseph r. Baxter VS.. Frank Lusher
ct al. Appellees brief Q0D
APPELLATE COURT.
Minutes
$3.50. Milton shirk, executor. etc. VS..
John Lngeman. Appellants petition for
s6i2 City of Evansville VS.. Mary f.
Christy. Appellees petition for additional
time granted Appellees brief 90
1851 Lewis F. Morford Chicago, In
dianapolis & Louisville Railroad Company.
SSH. William Z. Reynolds VS. Esther L.
Pierson ct al. Appellees petition for leave
to file brief.
New Appellate Court Suit
1892. David d. Gleason Samuel Nc
Ginnis Jasper C. c. Judgment for $500 for
money loaned Record. Assignment of
errors. In term. Bond
SUPERIOR COURT.
Room 2-John l.. McMaster, Judge.
Charles Mathews VS.. Thomas McGruder;
to quiet title Finding for defendant on COM
plant Finding FOR defendant on his cross
complaint quoting his title TO property
described in complaint. Judgment against
plaintiff for costs.
Theodore P Davis. Special Judge.
Martha E. Landers VS. State Bank of
Indiana; damages. On trial by jury.
Room flames NJ. Leathers Judge.
Laura B. Hockett VS.. Indianapolis Street
cluded. Argument heard. Jury instructed
and retire.
Room 3-vinson Carter Judge.
Sherd A. Coyle rs. George w. Coyle re-
plevin: Jury. return verdict for plaintiff
and that value of horse is $500. also an
swer TO interrOgatories
James w. Muir. executor, VS.. The In
danapolis Millinery Company; on check.
Dismissed and costs paid
Lottie r. Martin VS.. Elizabeth Melms ct
al; contract. Plaintiff dismisses cause.
Judgment against plaintiff for costs.
CIRCUIT COURT.
Henry Clay Allen, Judge.
Maria b. Woodwork VS.. Mary J. Vim
sons Estate; claim Submitted to court.
Evidence heard. Taken under advisement
tate; claim. Submitted to court. Finding
for estate. Judgment against plaintiff for
costs.
William NJ Ernnsting VS. Robert ]. Ro-
chow ct al; note Submitted TO court
Evidence heard. Finding for defendants
Carl and Otto c. Rochow. Finding and
judgment for plaintiff against Robert ].
Rochow for $161 without relief and costs.
Horton & Jackson vs.. Anna T. Ha-
zen's Estate; claim. Submitted TO court.
Allowed for SITS and costs against estate.
City of indianapolis VS.. c. W. Hoffman;
from City Court. Dismissed by plaintiff.
Judgment against plaintiff for costs.
John Burke VS.. David w. Vests Estate;
claim Submitted to court. Evidence heard.
Taken under advisement.
James f.. Ray ct al VS.. William A.
Askren ct al; mechanics lien. Dismissed
for want of prosecution. Judgment against
plaintiff for costs.
City of Indianapolis VS.. James F. Lambs
ct al; from City Court. Plaintiff dismisses
cause. Judgment against plaintiff for costs.
City of Indianapolis VS.. Cora Hall; from
City Court. Defendant enters plea of guilty.
Fine of 81 and costs, defendant to stand
committed until paid or replevied.
City of Indianapolis VS.. Marie Brooks;
from City Court. Defendant enters plea of
guilty. Fine of 81 and costs, defendant to
stand committed until paid or replevied.
City of Indianapolis VS.. Alice Long; from
City Court. Defendant enters plea of guilty.
Fine of 81 and costs. defendant to stand
committed until paid or replevied.
City of Indianapolis VS.. Ola Whelchel;
from City Court. Defendant defaulted. Ap-
peal dismissed. Judgment against defendant
for costs.
NEW SUITS FILED.
George Seidensticker, trustee VS.. Louis
Steidensticker ct AL: mortgage foreclosure.
Superior Court, Room 2.
Mccormack Harvesting Machine Com
pany VS. Katherine Wiese; on note. Super
Tor Court, Room l.
Maggie NJ Autrobus VS.. Frank Autrobus;
divorce Superior Court, Room 3.
Remington Sholes Company VS.. Edwin
r. Pillet; replevin- Circuit Court.
The Model Life Insurance Company VS..
Almon Abernathey mortgage foreclosure.
Superior Court Room l.
Mary A. Erwin VS.. Charles L. Erwin; di-
vOrce. Superior Court, Room 2.
William L. Ripley VS. Thomas F.. kares:
affidavit for attachment. Superior Court,
Room ].
William w Hubbard VS.. Peter Johnston
et al: mortgage foreclosure. Circuit Court.
Ida Smith VS.. Hazel Smith, divorce. Su-
perior Court, Room 2.