The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1901-10-31
HIGHER COURTS RECORD.
SUPREME COURT.

SUPREME COURT.
1890. Ralza VS.. Atkins & Co. Marion s.
&. Affirmed. Monks. &. il. In a COM
plant declaring in a written contract, free
from ambiguity. the averments cannot en-
large or change the construction or said
contract. and any averment to do SO nay
be stricken out or motion. ,. Where all
swers are sufficient as a general denial II IS
not error To Overrule "a demurrer 10 them.
J. When a party. even without right,
claims 10 rescind a contract If the other
party agrees TO the RECESSION, or does not
object thereto and permits il TO be re-
scinded, the RECESSION Is by mutual consent.
T. The general effect Of a RECESSION OF "A
contract is to remit both parties TO their
original rights in respect to the subject
matter thereof. .. When a contract Is
rescinded by mutual consent or otherwise,
no action can be maintained for "A breach
thereon. D. Where a demurrer Is overruled
TO a bad pleading. and the record affima-
lively shows that the verdict and judgment
are based upon another paragraph which
Is good. or when the facts alleged in such
pleading are found 10 be untrue, the ruling
on the demurrer is harmless. :. Letters
written by a party to d contract with ref
erence 10 the subject matter prior TO its
execution. they are merged therein.
1868. Schrader VS.. State eX rel. Mason.
Warrick &. &. Dismissed. Jordan. il.
Where a judgment is rendered against a
road supervisor in his official capacity. and
before an appeal therefrOm is taken his
successor succeeds him TO all the rights and
duties of said office, the eX-supervisor has
no longer any title or interest in the suit
and is not entitled to prosecute the appeal
subsequently taken. ,. When a peremptory
mandate has been awarded against a pub
lie officer, but his term of office has ex-
pired and the writ has not been Obeyed,
the court may and should order an alias
peremptory writ to issue against his sue
cessOr i'm office. who is bound by the judg-
ment for the performance of the required
act.
Minutes
1885. State ex rel. Starr VS.. Edwin c.
Vaughn. judge Wells Circuit Court. Wells
&. G. Defendants demurrer 10 petition and
brief on demurrer. Realtors brief on de-
1862. Clyde wynegar VS.. State of Indi-
ana. Marion Criminal Court. Appellee's
1868. Moses Gonser ct al. VS.. State ex
rel. David Haskins. trustee ct al. Steuben
G. G. Appellant Aliens reply brief (S.)
1851. Mary r. Stuckwisch ct al. vs.. Ira
NJ Holmes. Marion g. G. Appellee's brief
o.
1866. Samuel l.. Wray VS.. James w. Fry
ct al. Hancock c. c. Appellants reply
APPELLATE COURT.
1856. Rauh VS.. Waterman. Marion S. C.
Affirmed. COmstock, J.-Where an action
of replevin is dismissed by the plaintiffs
and the costs fully paid by them without
prejudice and without trial of the cause
upon its merits, and the title to, ownership
and right of possession of the property
replevied having been in no way deter
mined. there is a breach of the replevin
bond. and the person may only recover
nominal damages. and a failure to assess
such damages is no ground for a reversal of
"A judgment i'm this court.
1859. Davis VS.. ScybOld. Hamilton G. G..
Affirmed. Black, c. J.-Where the eXcep-
joint an assignment of error or to "A single
one of them cannot be recognized in this
court.
1860. Stephens VS.. Smith. Delaware c. c.
Affirmed. Henley. il If either para
graph of several answers is good. error in
everything a demurrer TO any other is not
available. , There is no statute or rule of
law which permits a party TO test the suf-
ficiency of an answer in the first instance,
upon appeal. by "A direct assignment of err
ror for that purpose
36S9. New Pittsburg Coal Company VS..
Grant. Vigo e. c.. Petition for rehearing
overruled.
lIS5. King vs.. Wright. Floyd C. C. Ad-
1908. Churchman vs.. Insurance Company.
Bartholomew c. c. Motion to dismiss over
ruled.
Co. Allen S. c. Petition for rehearing and
motion to modify mandate everruled.
, tSSl; winding vs.. Snyder; Cass C. c.
492. Dawson VS.. Campbell. Delaware G.
G. Appellee's motion to file brief over
3757. Bartlett VS.. Williams. Marshall C.
C.. Appellants petition 10 transfer to Su-
Minutes
Asa. Andrew d. gBranstrator ct al. We.
"a AiiC - III diAHIi - Ailth - - RD-
pellants' brief on appellee's motion TO dis
miss, etc. 90
4iOs. Security Accident and Sick Benefit
Association vs.. Annie Lee. Bartholomew
c.. g.. Appellants brief 50
1861. Union Mutual r.. and l.. Association
vs.. Christina Aichele ct al. Nanderburg 5.
G.. Appellees' application for appeal to
Supreme Court.
$3.50. American Tin Plate Company VS..
David a. Williams. Madison S. c. Appel
lant's points. Appellants request for post
ponement. Granted Oral argument post
poned To Dec. Il. 1901.
S157. James r. Bartlett VS.. Miranda f. Will
liams ct al. Marshall G. G. Appellants
application for transfer to Supreme Court.
40SS. c.. c., c. q st. L.. Ry. CO. VS.. John
7. Stewart. Clay c. G. Appellee's petition
for certiorari. Waiver of notice.
New Cases
1904. State of Indiana eX rel. Addison B.
Mickey ct al. vs.. Joseph a. Woodruff. Orig
inal action. Mandamus. Steuben c. G.. Pc
titicn for writ of mandamus.
1905. b. * O. II. r. Co. VS.. Fernando w.
Daeglin. Lake s. G. Record. Assignment
of errors