The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1902-03-21
HIGHER COURTS RECORD.
SUPREME COTRT.


1921. Carnahan VS.. Campbell. Madison
s. C.. Reversed. Gillett, il. In a suit by
a receiver of a corporation TO collect. un-
paid stock subscriptions and the contract
of subscriptiOn provides that the assess
ments and payments are to be made in ac-
cOrdance with a contract made prior there
TO between the incorporators ana anotner
person such contract should be made d
part Of the complaint , a creditor of a
corporation may by contract waive his
right to collect from a stakeholder a debt
that the corporation tails to pay. 3. Equity
Will not aid an assignee or notes when he
took title thereto with notice of a defense
thereto.
1877. State ex rel Moore vs.; Board of
Commissioners Montgomery c. G. Ger
tiorari granted and issued:
1873. Bolton VS. Clark ParKe = Z.
ballots for inspection Of counsel in ac-
cordance with order of court
Minutes
1927. State ex rel. William r. Moore VS..
the Board of Commissioner of Clinton
county ct al. Montgomery c. G. Assign
ment of crOss-errOrs by board. Appellees'
assignment of errors. Appellee boards pc
tition for certiOrari and exhibit. Certiorari
1919 John Royse ct al. VS.. the Evans
vile & Terre Haute Railroad Company.
Proof of publication.
1912. Orange Palm ct al VS.. Robert N.
Voliva, guardian. Fountain c. c. APP
pellee's brief.
APPELLATE COURT.
$3.50. Roush VS.. Russell. Boone c.. c.. At
hrmed. Black, 1.-THE conflict of evidence
determined in the trial court cannot be
opened up and again decided here.
349S. Mount VS.. DehaVen, Fayette G. c.
/ Affirmed. Robinson, Z. il. The taking OF
a new note for an old one in the absence
: of an express agreement does not extin-
guish the old debt. 2. To substitute a new
debtor for an old one there must be a
mutual agreement of all the parties. 3.
While heirs thereto may pay the debts OF
an estate without administration, yet they
have no authority to represent the estate
or bind it in any way by agreement.
1851. Smith VS.. Williams. Lawrence {. c.
Reversed in part and affirmed in part
Wiley, il. The assignment of errors or
cross-erroTs is a pleading and must De
attorneys as such 2. No particular form
of words is necessary to create a warranty.
1t is the subject matter of the statement
and the circumstances under which 1t Is
made that are to be considered. 3. A war
ranty is express when created by the apt
and explicit statements of the seller. 4. The
fact that a heater smoked and that The
sarily imply that it was defective in any
manner III construction or material.
Minutes
1913. Rufus X. Syfers ct al. VS.. Samuel
A. Keiser. Upton c. c. Appellee's brief.
1928. George w. Black ct al. VS.. FranE
Nelson Marsh. Putnam c. c. Appellant
Blacks reply brief.
1928. William Fl. White VS.. Charles w
Mllcheii ct al VIZ - y Appelldh' pc
tition for extension granted to May ], 1872.
1910. Fred Laakemann VS.. Rebecc1
ockmo Johnson c. G. Appellant
petition for leave to file brief.
1851. The indianapolis Street-railway Com
pany VS.. Louise Tenner Marion s. G.. Pc
tition and brief for supersedeas. Bond.
4345. The Indianapolis Street-railway
Company VS.. Mary Lawn. Marion 5. {
Petition and brief for supersedeas. Su
perSedeas bond.
1891. William w. James ct al. VS.. Fred
erick r. Nugent. Orange G. c. Record
Assignment of errors. Notice.