Omaha daily bee., 1902-11-28

trial was Overruled.
q At a term subsequent 20 hat at which
the motion for a new trial was overruled
the unsuCCessful party asked the court 20
render iudgment on the veudict Held, that
slch party was not thereby p~recluded from
obtaining a review Of errors in this court
No. u5eN Andrews against Lillian Iuf-
sS6n5y. 2nrmea. kmas. C. division Ns' Z
Equity will not imterpuse 70 separate nom
irrigable lands from an %irrigauon district,
IN the absence Of a showing that the plain
tins have sought 20 avail Themselves Of the
statutory procedure providing for enectng
No. l2ieN. Weber against Lockman. Error
from Cedar county. Affirmed. Ames. C.,
A master may be liable IN damages caused
By negligence committed by his servants
while IN the course of bis employment al
ing without the knowledge or contrary TO
the known wishes Of the former.
LlS Paxton against scott Error from
Douglas county Affirmed. Hastings, c,
division No. J.
/ The question Of fraud in conveyznees
made prior TO July / rS9S, could not be
determined in a hearing on application BY
a bankrupt for his discharge m the bank
rupt proceedings
personal TO himself and does not AFFECT
any lien. either by contract or by judicial
proceedings, against property.
5 A judgment rendered on conflicting evil
dence VIII not be disturbed in this court
unless clearly wrong.
from Lancaster county Affirmed. Pound
c., division n. .
l. The differences which NAV be drawn
from the testimony in determining the pro-
priety OF a direction TO hnd a verdict for
the parties must have some reasonable
foundation in the facts shown.
2 In order TO hold a municipal corpora
ton liable for injuries received by reason
that the municipality, through its proper
officers. had notice Of the defect, OF else
that the defect had existed for 50 Ions a
time that IN the ordinary course Of things
they should have known OF u, and hence
are chsrgeable with constructive notice.
g. Notice Of the particular defect which
caused the injury Is not necessary where
Il Is shown that a general defective con-
ditiun existed and was known 70 The ON
GERS Of the municipality either actually or
a But IL is not sufhcient 20 show notice
Of a particular defect which H. different in
kin from and in no way related 10 the
one that produced the injury. and did not
contribute thereto in any manner.
LIS. Cass County against Sarpy County.
Error from Sarpy county. Former judg-
ment vacated. district court
af8rmed. Ames. c, division No. 8
l. 1t IS a rule Of construction, without
exception. that when one or two. or more
interpretations OF an ambiguous statute viii
ton. and the other OF others will cause II
TO conflict herewith. the former and not
the latter will be preferred.
3 A county is excused from contributing
toward the expense Of repairing a bridge
over a stream dividing Il from an adJoin-
making the repairs AID so in violation OF
the law regulating the manner OF making
such repairs upon bridges for the main
tenance OF which 1t is solely responsible.
3. The provisions OF chapter Is, entitled
Roads" Of the Compiled Statutes. relat-
ing TO the building OF bridges over streams
dividing counues, are not in violation OF
T2e05. schumacher against Crane-Church-
i'll Company. Error from Douglas county
Reversed. Pound, division No. =
/ An order transferring an action in
! nF Emnmfahta nHfanEpE raised IN an answer.
will not preclude the moving party rom
demanding that the purely legal issues be
tried by the jury, II MS request Tor a jury
trial is timely and is insisted upon.
I .. In such case. going to trial upon all the
any Of them, is a waiver Of a jury as TO
3. A waiver Of a Jury at the hrst trial in
/ ejectment will not have the effect 81 pre-
| Gliding either party from demanding a
Jury at the second trial. after the IudE-
ment rendered at the first trial has been
set aside under section $50, Code Civil Pro
cedure.
No. 1227. Engle against Dado. Error
from Saline county. AH1rmed- Leolnger'
/ one custody Of the property in
displre n a proper defendant IN repleyln.
2 Defec. 81 parties viii be waived II not
raised by demurrer or answer.
3 Instructions not excepted 20 and Oh
| trial CT petition in error viii not be re-
No. los Doody against National Ma
sonic Accident Association. Error from
Lancaster county. Affirmed. Albert c.
division No. s.
its members according TO the hazard o.
their respective occupations. the platntin
belonged 70 a class which entitled its mem
bers TO S.59 for the loss OF a hand by acct
dent: the members Of another class were
entitled 10 but 500 for such injury; a clause
Of The bylaws. which were a part of the
greater amount should be paid any Menu
Der than the amount payable % the latter
] H. -. anw inv waRafEaa WhNNn hunting
or in any way using or handling firearms
the plaintiff lost his hand by the discharge
I Of a gun which he was removing from one
room Of his house, where IL was left by
one Of his boarders, TO another. Held, that
his cover was limited to 800
No. 1922 Read against Valley Land and
Cattle Company. Error from Lincoln
county. Reversed Oldham, C.. division
/ II il improper to permit an expert TO
give his opinion on the ultimate fact 70
be determined by the jury.
jury in the trial Of a cause TO permit an
expert 10 give his opinion as 10 the amount
Of damages which should be awarded
B. Where IL is practicable 70 place be
fore the jury all the. facts supporting the
opinion of a n~on-expert, the witness should
ana ne Jurors left to form their opinion
from the facts alone without the aid OF the
10. Iy5S, Shrek against HanIon. Error
from Clay county. Reversed with instruc-
tons. Dufie. C. division No. g.
bankrupt under the act Of congress. APP
proved J1ly j, uSS. the trustee appOinIec
in that proceeding may maintain an action
to set aside a conveyance made by the
bankrupt at any uu~e within two years
after the estate has been closed provided
the action was not barred by the laws OF
this state At the time the petition in bank
q ruptcy MAS uled-
2 II is not always a defense in an actor
to set aside a conveyance as fraudulent ina
the grantor had properly remaining ate
the conveyance was made SUFFICIENT 70 sat
isfy his creditors. II the conveyance wai
in fact fraudulent and made for the purpOs'
Of dsfrauding creditors they may have 1
set aside on showing TO that eject anf
the further showing hat at the time o.
, commencing the action he had 10 property
subject to execution OuI Of which thei
claim could be made.
l228. Merrill against Suing. Error from
Cedar unit Reversed and dismissed
Barnes, C, Division No. .
a breach Of covenants OF title and TO
quiet enjoyment the plaintiff must allegl
and prove hat he has been turned out o
> the possession Of the granted premises, o
some part thereof. or compelled 20 yieli
the possession thereof TO one having para
mount title.
2 Where a reply sets up new matter il
avoidance Of the matters OF defense con
tanned In the answer which may fairly b
said 20 amount 70 a departure from tn
original cause Of action stated in the ped
ton, a motion to strike out such neE
matter and eliminate IL from the 7epil
should be sustained
g. An instruction submitting such nes
- - Whn MnnR ~ HhaNE annrHAaEaWHn