Omaha daily bee., 1902-02-08
SUPREME COURT SYLLABI.

Company against storey. Appeal from
Madison. Judgment Oldham, c. Division
When a bin in equity 10 filed by the
creditors Of an ipsolysnt .Sorporstion iSr
scriptions TO the capital stock of such cor
poration to the payment OF the corporate
delinquent subscribers to such capital stock
be made n party defendant, and unless all
and sufioient reason appears upon the face
OF the petition such as death. insolveney.
Jthe SQUIRT the deIInauent suSscPIbsrs not
Joined as defendants, the petition IL bad
because OF a non-joinder OF parties de-
loss. Stewart against Afien. Asts~s
from Custer. Affirmed. Oldham. c., div
i. Alleged errors Of the trial court In. the
exclusion OF evidence can not be examined
2 Evidence examined and held suffclent
to sustain the Judgment
against crSndsii. Appeal from Lancaster.
Ahirmed Hastings C., division No. l.
l. IAN appraisement duly made of real
estate for the purpose Of q judicial. sale
can not be successfully attacked solely on
praised too low. To make the low valus-
tion q successful ground Of attack on the
appraisement II must be challenged for
fraud. Brown against Fitzpatrick. SO
NsOI2 eSsart,aeats that sppraisers ware sworn
by the sheriff by a deputy held to sun.
ciently indicate that the deputy performed
euCn SERVICES. t
iOSsO, farmers Loan and Trust company
against Hastings. Appeal from Douglas.
Affirmed. Pound, c., division No. q I'm
l. statutory provisions as 10 the manner
Of levying special assessments must be
2 On appeal this court Is not bound TO
pass. upon questions. not fairly raised on
the briefs Of counsel for appellant.
g. Where several special assessments
were found to be Invalid in the lower court
pends upon statutes now repealed. 80. that
70 pass upon them VIII require 2 minute
iaborious search for the several statutes
/ applicable thereto. assertions In a~ppellants
/, brief that such assessments are valid hnd
; out stating any reasons for such opinion
Z or afrording any material assistanee 20 this
r No. 1OSI2. wooiworth against Safer. APP
, peal from Custer. Reversed and remanded.
I i. In a suit to roreclose a real estate
2 without proof to support the sverment OF
I his petition that no suit or proceedings az
law have been had to recover ne eenS 3.
. put N issue by the answer.
$ 2 The introduction of the note and mort
s tain an allegation that no action. at law
I aas been Instituted to collect the debt.
y ror from JEFFERSON. Afarmed. Hfoieemb. J.
d 1 When the plaintiff IN an action IN
has been issued, dies, and the time for re-
vivor by a conditional order had elapsed
and no effort Is made to revive the action
G sor in interest. and the action is dismissed
or stricken from the docket by the trial
d Of the action and a suit on the Injunction
bond may thereafter be maintained.
Dodge. Affirmed. Holcomb, j.. !.
l. Amendment of section of the Criminal
G9SSs In iSS Sp sSthS eonVisti Z Jury NJ so os secnsed
should suffer the death penalty. OF, be I'M
prisoned in the penitentiary during i Ms
law with reference to the qualifications Of
Jurors in prosecutions for offenses where
- State. AZ Neb., sos.
20 3. The entertaining of conscientious scru,
!, for chsaIiense }or cause in the prosecution
sa for murder in the first degree Dinsmor'
against State, = Neb.. =; IS N. W. Rep.
D. s. In order to render a Juror incompeten
re- It Is not required that MS opinions IN
~ punishment should be such as to absoi9tei!
ne Forbid him under any circumstances iron
~ rendering a verdict innicting the ueati
i, 1 When a Juror entertains opinions Q
death penalty such as will bias his judg
. ment and Influence him in the consideration
R Sfst the answers sy1ssnefi leave as Sp Ris oqSS i o
- that point In doubt or uncertainty Y J
o oot t ssrq sta toF 's esa iTIaaa so for cause "a se'"ss ~
s. In the determination OF the auannca
ton Of Jurors o i IN 2 ssimlnd siy RTSse tSs tais
' court which is greater when exercised
m excusing Jurors from rerving where tnel
i" qualifications are in doubt than in their re
,m & The finding of she trial court in decld
u" ing a challenge for cause will not be sc
aside by the appellate court unless man
fest error appears. Bayse v. state % Nep
~, mm 4. Rulings OF trial court in excusing &c,
m tain Jurors Of the states challenge 70
IN cause held not to be err9neousii ur,,.,
ton or attempt to perpetrate any rap
arson, robbery or burglary is by section
,m degree. The turpitude OF the act Is, in II
IN exceptional cases mentioned in the etatu
and premeditated malice, while a pp;pol
to kill is conclusively presumed frSn tf
intention e n ,s TnlSs is M Sns sSse yn State az ' 81 N SIS
672, r~e-examined and adhered to.
pm 8. The rule that in adopting a statui
ally construed the Legislature also adop'
IN the construction thus placed on the statut
conclusive presumption. And where sue
om adopted statute Is not In all respects u
I'M is 8ssp sss 81 81; 4 N mattel sIts anS BY BY s a pSiag =
Earding which r the .,I prior roDs eonss5Seti'
tdeemed unsatisfactory In reasoning and o.
pm Court OF the adopting state Is not abs
pm 8 warranted In refusing to adopt or folio
the same.
An ~. III Is not error 70 lHbtfuCI the Jul
that II is suficient to constitute murder
the first degree, IF there was such desil
and determination to kill distinctly form
pm In the mind at any moment before or
the time the blow was struck" where q
am remainder OF the instruction properly d
fnes purpose, elaboration and pfemedft
ton. states that the proposed act mu
IN have been deliberated and premeditat
"" upon before II was committed, and Ii
evident that the language quoted REFER
to the existence of the purpose and not {
pn time OF it's formation. CARLTON v. State,
III Neb., 373, followed.
em If. An instruction should be constru
as a whole and not by its division In
fragmentary parts.
IL. Where II IL stated In an instruct
m that the act of killing to constitute murd
"" In the FIRST degree must be performed
furtherance of the design OF purpose ID
viously formed the instruction Is net IL
defed erroneous because further on In I
same instruction II IL said, III a pers
pm has actually formed the purpose mali
an ously TO XIII and has deliberated and n
pm meditated upon IL before he performs 4
.m act and then performs II he Is guilty
Dln murder in the first degree" without
iterating that the act must have been dc
in pursuanee OF the previously formed
sign.
pm 10. An instruction which has no fount
am ton In the evidence upon which to base
pm Is properly refused.
Il. An instruction regarding a point VIII
has been substantially covered and inclue
am In another instruction given may prope