The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1903-03-13
HIGHER COURTS RECORD.
SUPREME COURT.


aoo22. Smith VS. Borden De Kalb c. c.
Affirmed Jordan, il Where the record
is silent as to the ruling upon a demurrer
to certain paragraph of answer this court
cannot consider an assignment OF error
thereon. 2 To present the error Of the
trial court I'm denying motion TO strike
out a pleading the motion must be made
a part of the record by a bill of exceptions.
or by order of court, and in addition thereto
the party relying upon such error must
present some argument showing that an
error was committed 3. In determining
the sufficiency of pleading the court must
consider Ii in regard 10 its general scope
and as entirety. T. Representative in
the sale OF an article may be sufficient TO
constitute an express warranty, although
the word warranty is not used. 5. Any
positive representation, assertion CT az
firmation made by the seller during the
tendency of the negotiations for a sale not
being mere expression of opinion or belief,
which fairly expresses the intention OF tho
seller to warrant the article or property
stitute an express warranty.
2OO31 Palmer, etc, Co. VS. Heat, ETC., Co.
Where a finding of court is not within the
issues IL must be disregarded.
2O056. Cordes Battorff. jackson c. G.
Fifteen days additional time granted ap-
pellee for filing general brief.
1896. c., l. & E. Ry. Co VS.. Indiana,
etc, Co. Grant Z. c. Transferred TO APP
pellate Court.
Bottorff Jackson c. c. Appellees petition
for additional time granted.
APPELLATE COURT.
43lS Warner VS.. Warner. Adams c. c.
Reversed. Black. p. il delivery OF
goods sold is not essential at common law
to the validity OF the sale, and the statute
of fraud does not require delivery where
the contract Is in writing: 2 The presump-
ton of fraud and invalidity In sale OF
goods arising from the want of delivery
and change of possession is INDUCED only
in favor OF creditors OF the vendor or SUBJ
sequent purchasers In good faith. 5. IL 10
not necessary TO the validity OF an assign
ment OF goods by way Of mortgage as be-
tween the parties thereto that the goods be
and the want of acknowledgement and
recording. where the goods are nus deliv-
cred and retained. does not render the
mortgage invalid except as against others
than the parties thereto.
1919. Wilson VS.. Miller. Grant s. c. Az
irmed- Henley. J.-Where the wife OF an
purchase from assignee she can dispose OF
4ss4. zoos VS. Lang wabash c. c. APP
peal dismissed and leave granted to with
draw record.
ALB. United Brotherhood OF Carpenters
and Joners OF America VS.. Elizabeth Din
i7O5. The City of Huntington VS.. John
Lusch. Huntington c. c. Appellants
ass. 1851. John Ludwick VS.. Margaret Petr,e
ct al. Huntington c. c. Appellants
brief (s)
1852 Franzska Zeller ct al Anna B.
Zeller, executrix Huntington c. c. APP
pellee's brief S)
4si0. Charles A. Winters VS. Joseph NJ.
Coons. Randolph c. c. Waiver OF oral
argument.
1850. Celestia Matthews VS.. Wesley Will
son. wsrrick c. c. Appellee's petition for
oral argument.
New Case
475l. c.. I. f. Railway Company w.
Indiana Natural Gas and OH Company.
Grant c. c. Transferred from Supreme
Court (No. l9S06.)