The Washington times. (Washington [D.C.]) 1901-1902, 1902-03-03
Free Pass Holder Loses.

person injured through: ::hse negligence
OF railroad company. while being car
ried as passenger on a free pass. which
stipulates that the carrier shall not be
liable to the holder of the pass for any
injuries arising from the carriers negli-
5ence. can not recover therefor. holds the
Supreme Court OF Indiana in the case
of Payne VS.. Terre Haute & l. R. Co. (ss
N. e. Rep, 4731
Divorced Wife Can Sue.
A divorced wife may sue her former
husband for share of the expenses In
CURED by her in support Of their minor
children. whose custody was awarded her In
| the divorce decree. and for their future sup
port so long as she maintains their custody
and control. holds the Supreme Court of
| Washington in the case of Ditmar Va
Ditmar t67 Pac. Rep. 353).
Railroad Not to Blame.
mail clerk bought food at the eating
house of a railroad, but owing to the
starting OF his train, LEFT before receiv-
ing his change from the manager who
was employed by the railroad. Some days
later the mail clerk took dinner there
and paid for 1t, and demanded the change
due MIN on the previous trip. The man
ager said that the change had been given
and an alteration ensued. As the mail
clerk was leaving he called the manager
a vile epithet, who seized a revolver. ran
out of the house, and shot the mail clerk
as he was getting on his car. infficting a
serious wound. The mail clerk sued the
railroad company for damages. but on ap-
peal the Court of Civic Appeals of Texas
held that he was not entitled to recov-
er. the railroad company was not re-
sponsible for the act of the manager of
the restaurant. in this instance. although
he was its agent Uytle VS.. Crescent News
ard Hotel Co.. Sc s W. Rep. 240)-
Binding on Partner.
An agreement by an attorney in advance
of the rendition of legal service not to
charge a fee therefor is held by ~. Court
of Appeals of Kentucky in the case of
Stone VS.. Hart (66 S. W Rep. 15D to
be binding on his partner. though the
latter was ignorant Of the agreement I'M
der which the services were rendered.
Falls on Railroad Company.
The danger from limbs of tree. which
a railroad company permits to hang over
its tracks so low that they may come in
contact with employees while engaged in
their duties on the tops of its cars, is
held by the Appellate Court of Indiana, in
the case of the Pittsburg and Chicago
Railway Company VS.. Parish t62 ". E.
Rep, SD, not to be one of the dangers
incident to the service, which an employee
necessarily assumes when he enters such
service.
Partners Are Responsible
The fact that partners organized cor
poration to engage in the same business
in which the partnership had been en-
gagged is no. evidence of Il dissolution of
the partnership and of the assumption of
it's business by the corporation, and.
therefore, a servant OF the partnership,
who continued after the corporation was
organized to work as before, without be-
ing discharged or re-employed, continued
to be 4 servant of the partnership. and
may look to the partners for damages for
injuries thereafter received by him
through the gross negligence of the fore
man. Goodwin VS.. Smith, So S. W. Rep.
179).
Court Is in Error.
Where the court, upon motion of the
defendant. in an action to recover dam
ages for personal injuries. appointed two
physicians to examine plaintiff. but the
defendant. before any examination had
been made. withdrew its motion therefor,
the Court of Appeals of Kentucky. in the
case of South Covington. etc. Railway
Company VS.. Strob t66 s. W. Rep. I'D,
holds that it was error to permit the
physicians thus appointed. who were in
troduced by the court on its own motion.
to testify over defendants protest as
to an examination made by them after :he
motion was withdrawn.