Omaha daily bee., 1902-09-27

Burlington voluntary relief department OF
the Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad
of STm tSafS dePp TTy11ing mai E q S siect to me aeeept
the benefits provided by the certificate
they must waive all right of action. against
ceived. Examined and held valid.
2 The election of the widow OF a member
of the voluntary relief department Of the
company to accept the provisions OF a
relief certificate In which she is the bene-
ficiary does not bar an action by the per-
sonal representative OF the deceased
against the railroad ompany under the
provisions Of section 2, chapter xxi, Com
piled Statutes of Nebraska, for the benefit
of the minor children OF the deceased.
3. A judgment recovered by an adminis-
traitor under the provisions OF section 2,
chapter xxi, Compiled Statutes of Me-
braska is for exclusive benefit of the widow
and the next of kin of such deceased per-
in his petition for damages fails to name
ell the legal benefclartes provided for In
this act will not bar any legal distrlbutee
not named In his petition from receiving
his distributive share OF the judgment re-
covered.
statute has been recovered from the Chi
cago, Burlington g. Quincy Railroad COM
pany for the unlawful killing of one of its
employees, who is a member OF the volun-
tary relief department. of such company,
the beneficiary named in the certificate of
such employee cannot maintain a cause OF
action against tine railroad company GA
such benefit certificate.
1874. Robertson against Brooks. Error
from Pawnee. Reversed, with instructions.
Duffie, c., division No. 3.
l. On foreclosure of a first mortgage a
second mortgage was made a party and
served by publication only. She did not
appear in the action and the decree barred
her equity of redemption. On sale under
the decree there remained a surplus after
paying the costs and the AMOUNT found due
on the first mortgage. Held, following
Moss against Robertson, Sc Neb., 744, that
the lien of the second mortgage was trans:
| farraN from fha land IN the GIrnlIa and
that the holder of the second mortgage
was entitled to such surplus, as against
the owner of the equity of redemption.
2. Under the facts above stated, while
the second mortgage had a lien on the
surplus, her right TO demand possession
was foreclosed and the amount due thereon
judicially determined, and the statute OF
limitations would not e9mmenee to run run
verted the fund until such foreclosure was
had.
from Douglas. Reversed, with instructions
Pound, c., division No. 2.
/. 1t is error to award a writ of assist
and ~pendente lite claiming an independent
title, not derived from or in succession "a
any of the parties to the suit or their
2. one who is in possession in good faith
without collision, under a void tax deed
asserting title t~hereunder, claims BY az
Independent title, not derived from that OF
the owners OF the fee, and may not be dis
possessed under a writ Of assistance.
8. The purpose OF the rule as to lis pend
ems is to prevent third persons, during the
tendency of the litigation, from acquiring
interests in the Ian which would preclude
the court from granting the relief sought.
4. Hence, such rule has no application e
Independent titles, not derived from any o.
the parties 20 the suit, nor in succession Il
! them.
s. Section IS. Code of Civil Procedure. doei
not extend the rule so as to include per
sons acquiring rights or interests in no waN
danandapf unOn Or HaFiVad thFnnRh fhOgf
OF persons made parties to the suit.
The following opinions will not be ON
cially reported:
1884. Rouss against Goldgraber. Error
from Lancaster. Reversed and remanded
Pound, c., division No. 2. Unreported.
Where neither fraud nor mistake is nj