The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1902-10-11
HIGHER COURTS. RECORD.
SUPREME COURT.

u. Z. y. w
transcript is filed in the proper court
upon appeal and when notice is given TO
the appellee, II necessary, the jurisdiction
of the court TO which the appeal is taken
is complete. and the transcript becomes
a record of that court, and il cannot be
removed, altered or amended without the
leave of the court in which the appeal
is pending, and any addition TO or dimi-
mutton of the record without leave of the
court is a mere mutilation or Interpolation
having no legal efficacy and affording no
foundation for relief or redress TO the party
perpetrating 1t. 2. The act of 1901. giving
to trial courts in certain cases the power
to extend the time for filing bills of ex-
ceptions acts 1901. p. SID is unconstitu-
tional as being in conflict with that pro-
vision of the State Constitution which pro-
hibits the passage OF any law impairing
obligations of contracts. 3 A Judgment is
a contract of record and its obligation is
impaired whenever the observance of those
forms and rules of procedure, in force
when il was obtained and by which it is
protected and sustained, are annulled or
set aside. 4. An allegation Of knowledge or
notice includes not only actual knowledge
or notice but implied or constructive no.
tice, and proof either of actual knowledge
or that the defendant by the exercise of
ordinary care might have obtained such
knowledge is admissible under the general
allegation of knowledge notice. 5. An
| instruction is not objectionable when Ii
does not go beyond the scope Of the COM
| plant.
| I934S Harness VS.. Steele Howard g. c.
Affirmed. Jordan, il A complaint for
| false Imprisonment need not allege that
| the act complained of was illegal or
wrongful, or that the arrest or imprison-
ment was without complete authority, or
/ malicious, without probable cause.
| 2. IL is not necessary to plead facts on
| special answer which can be admitted I'M
/ der a general denial. 3. Where an instruc-
/ ton is correct as far as ii goes, but in
! complete, it may be completed by another,
which supplies the defects. 4. The sheriff
! is peace officer, and on making an arrest
| without warrant is required to take his
| prisoner before some committing officer for
| the purpose of having the party so ar
rested charged by affidavit. 5. The power
| of OBTAINING a person arrested without
warrant, and restraining him of his lib
erty, is not matter within the discretion
| of the party making the arrest 6. If a
person arrested is detained or held by the
| officers for a longer period of time than
| is required under the circumstances, with
/ out warrant or authority, he will have a
| cause of action for false Imprisonment
against the officer and all others by whom
he has been unlawfully detained or held
z. An officer arresting without a warrant
cannot justify his action in holding or
OBTAINING the prisoner for an unreasonable
| time before obtaining a warrant upon the
! ground that such delay was necessary in
order to investigate the case and procure
/ evidence against the accused.
| 1868. Hart VS. State ex rel. Hite. Marion
c. c. Affirmed. Hadley, il Under Sec
| ton 622, Burns 1901, where a sole defendant
| appears and files an answer to the merits
the summons is thereby eliminated from
4 summons
| be restored to the record by bill of ex-
| ceptiOns. 2 To present a question depend
ent upon the ruling of the trial court upon
a motion TO quash an alternative or per
| ermptory writ the latter should be In the
| bill of exceptions 3. Mere uncertainty or
| lnadequacy of averment in a complaint,
such as might have been amended and
cured upon motion seasonably made, will
be deemed to have been waived by de-
PENDANT who proceeds with the trial to
hnal judgment without objection.
of
Vigo. S. c. Petition for rehearing over
| ruled.
l99O9. Hogan VS.. City of Indianapolis.
Marion S. c. Oral argument Oct. %. 1902.
Minutes
1880. William j. Hogan VS.. City of In
dianapolis. Marion s. C. Set for oral argu-
| ment Oct. g. 1902.
1851 Board of Commissioners of Owen
County ct al; VS.. Richard Newport. Owen
c. C. Appelle's reply brief C0 cross
| errors.
1890. John Downey ct al VS. State ex rel
Elmer E. Hastings. Daviess c. c. APP
1870 State of Indiana ex rel Romus F.
Stuart ct al. Marion c. c. Appellants pc
| tition to advance. -,
1884 Indianapolis & Vincennes Railroad
Company VS.. Indianapolis & Martinsville
Rapid Transit Company. Marion c. c. APP
| pellees brief (S.)
APPELLATE COURT.
| 352S. Hines VS.. Coal Co Hamilton c. G.
Affirmed. Black, il Where a contract
for the construction of sidewalks in a city
| was subiet to another firm who purchased
material therefor from third person and
| the subcontractor gave an order for pay
| ment upon the original contractor, which
| was verbally accepted, but not paid. an
action therefor. will lie against the bond
| of the original contractor, when il pre-
walls for the performance of the contract
whereby the contractor is Ito furnish all
the materials and to pay for all
labor and material used, etc" 2. In failing
to present a matter of defect to parties as
provided by statute an objection thereto is
| waived.
4O7O. Erhardt VS.. Pfeiffer. Allen s. c.
| Reversed. Henley, IA complaint that is
defective on account of the failure of the
pleader to set out the original or a copy
| of the written instrument upon which the
pleading is formed may be cured by ver-
dict and finding, but judgment by default
will not cure defective complaint in any
stands in exactly the same position as IL
attacked in the trial court by demurrer.
4444. p, c., c. & st. L. Railway Company
VS. Broadstreet. Marion S. C. Dismissed.
1856. Newman VS.. Gates. Marion s. c.
Appellant permitted to amend assignment
of errors.
Martin C. C. Motion to strike out parts
of record overruled.
Minutes
1856. Jacob Newman ct al surviving
partners, etc., VS.. Harry B. Gates. Marion
s. c. Amendment to and additional as
1909 volney T. Malott, receiver, VS.. Eliza.
beth Hawkins, administrators Marion S
c. Appellants reply brief (S.)
Ass. Baltimore & Ohio Southwestern Rail-
road Company VS.. William Hunsucker
| jackson c. G. Assignment of cross-errors
4275. Mary III. Haugh ct al VS.. Maria p
Smelser. Rush c. c. Appellants petition
for oral argument.
4421. Arthur Burns VS.. Trustees of Hun
tertown Cemetery Church ct al, and Frank
| s. Holmes ct al VS.. Trustees of Hunter.
town Cemetery Church ct al. Allen S. c.
Appellees' brief S)
4443. Ellery c. Webster eft al. VS.. Sylvanus
Major. Putnam c. c. Appellee's petition
for additional time.
1880. Edward Il. Trent ct al, VS. Andrew
j. Edmonds. Owen c. c. Appellee's petit.
ton for extensions of time.
New Cases.
1913. Mary A. Lusch VS.. James Pool et
al. Huntington G. c. Record. Assignment
of errors. Notice to attorneys of record OF
| appellee Stoffel. Praecipe notice to Aller
county for appellee Pools
1914. Indianapolis & Greenfield RapiC
Transit Company VS.. Marion S. Foreman
Henry c. c. Record. Assignment of errors
In term. Bond.
Marriages and Divorces.
| CtotfsticS have heen patharad NV tba =.