Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1903-01-16
QUESTIONS Law
8, uAxY. Df.e e HANDED down IN
SUPREME COURT.
SEVERAL KN0TTY PROBLEMS
disappointment Rife Tint the Fans
on. A1,i.on Case Is Not Included In
the pntch-norfork and Newport
scws Suit. in the List.

News SHIFTS In tho LIST.
Nfi,~,, IN the SteaDpc'nt-re-t Of the law
ye--- <,<4.,,a S.o.e o-,>s cr-+-o-v 70 al' ev-S
s 13e>.t,.tr,>ef tr,. s,.n-c.->e Cc,-rt of anneo3s
ddd 10. Se'sver -, cninicn IN The viii case
o. .Ts-.eas W. Allison. j.. infant etc. VS..
Js-aes w AIIisnn.s execrtcrs and Others.
The case has herorne fenors. not rniv
On account of ffe amount of the estate
fYro1yed tle prn-,icnrce ~ the contes-
farts md the per-,liarfty of the evidence.
8 but for several Fnotty problems which
the members of the bar are anxious to see
solved.
Jnarc JAMES Keith. P. affi-med the de-
cision or the Circuit Cou-f. or the CITY OF
5 Norfolk. In the case of the Postal Tee
graph Cable Co,npa nv VS.. the city or Nor
folk It appears that the Postal Te'e-
greph COMPANY was taxed to the ACRE
gate value of its property located In Nor
folk. In addition to certain other taxes on
8 poles condu,fs. etc. NIL of which were au
thorfzef by the acts. The company hav-
s ir- failed to pay these taxes to the city.
was summoned to appear in the Police
& Court to show cause why 1t should not
be fined was fnrnd guilty. and Judgment
was entered against it for sz15o. fine and
costs.
LEASE ON AN OFFICE.
Thomas B. Henley VS.. the Cotterefl Real
Estate. Insurance and Loan Company.
WIS sent on from the Corporation Court
Of the city of Newport News. Thomas B.
Henley claims that he had lease on an
e Office IN n certain building In Newport
News for five years. and in consideration
of the same. he had put valuable Improve
j ments Cd the same. The building formerly
belonged to Mr.. H. w. silsby. of New
York. of which the firm of Henley &
Z Warren. of which Thomas B. Henley Is
the successor, were agents. Recently Mr..
H. W. Silsby sold the building to the Cot
terrell Real Estate Insurance Company.
who refuse to recognize Mr.. HenleN.s
claim. since there was no written con-
tract. Judge Keith holds that the COM
pany prevails in the controversy. since it
seems that Mr.. Henley has no defence at
law for the contract which he claims.
and that the decree appealed. so far as It
undertakes to dismiss the action Of the
unlawful retainer. should be amended and
affirmed.
RECOVER NEGOTIABLE NOTES.
The cage of Pettyjohn. VS.. the National
Echange Bank, of Lynchburg. was a mo-
tfon by the bank against w. j. Graham.
J. w Holleran and Walker Petty5ohn
to received certain negotiable notes signed
by Graham & Hol1eran. PAYABLE to Walk
er Pettyjohn. and purporting to be slgEe !
by him The notes were delivered at the
bark and placed to the credit Of Graham
e. Holleran Pettyjohn filed plea of nil
4 debit. accompanied withsan affidavit deny
ing that he had signed or authorized any
one to sign the notes. or that there was
any partnership between him and any
uerson who signed The Circuit Court OF
Lynchburg. sent in a verdict for the
hank Judge S. c. Wh1ttle reversed the
decision with the opinion that while
each member of trading partnership
has. as a general rule, implied authority
to bind 5 associates by signing the firm
name, Ii. has no authority. by virtue OF
the partnership relation alone, to bind
co-partner by signing his lnd1vlduai name
to partnership paper
The case of Fallsburg Power and Manu-
featuring Company We. John -. AleNan-
dria, etc, was the question OF the right
to condemn certain lands needed for the
purpose OF a corporation as an internal
Improvement company. The case was
.,a:.. o:l from the Circuit Court of Abe
marie county Judge X. n. Caro"eii
confirmed the verdict Of the lower court,
Ewing the opinion that neither in our
Constitution nor in the constitution OF
o,iier States of the Union. is there any
express provision forbidding the leglsla-
ture to pass laws whereby the. private
property Of one citizen may be taken
and transferred to another for his private
uses.
The object Of the suit Of Tatum VS..
Tatuu's administrator. etc. was to en-
force the payment Of certain debts Sc
cured or alleged to be secured by two
seeds OF trust executed by w. F. Tatum
In his lifetime upon his lands. The debts
were dieallowed by the Circuit Court
and Judge John A. Buchanan affirmed
the verdict given there.
OTHER OPINIONS DELIVERED.
The opinions delivered yesterday are
cases that do not carry any general
interest. Following are the opinions:
By Judge James Keith. P:
Postal Telegraph-Cable Company VS.
City OF Norfolk Circuit court city OF
Norfolk Affirmed
Henley US. Cottre1l Real Estate, Insur.
tnce and Loan Company. Corporation
court, city Of Newport News. Amended
Ind affirmed.
sy Judge R. II. Cardwell:
Fallsburg Power. &C., Co. VS.. Alexander
&C. Circuit court Of Albemarle county
Affirmed.
Tuggle VS.. Berkeley ct ais. Circuit
court OF Prince Edward county. Amend
I'd and affirmed.
n t3;,ntnn commissioners. VS.. Wood ct ais