The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1904-02-04
HIGHER COURTS RECORD.

20112. Webb VS.. Insurance Co. Marion
c. c. Reversed Jordan il The office
of a special finding is to find facts, and no
omission of a fact therein can be supplied
by intendment. 2 From the mere fact
that party to a transaction at the date
thereof has notice from record thereof
that the other party was a married man,
the first party is not bound to assume
that such conjugal relations continued to
exist more than four years later. 3. Facts
constituting estoppel in order to be avail
able must be especially pleaded. 4. When
anything is prohibited directly it cannot be
done Indirectly. 3. A married woman cam
not evade the positive prohibition of becom-
Ing surety in Section 69e4 Burns, 1901, by
Vestlng the title to her real estate in her
husband or some other person, for the sole
purpose OF permitting it to be mortgaged
to secure debt other than her own, where
the party accepting such security knows
that the continuance was resorted to for
the purpose of eVadng the law. 6. Trans
actions whereby married womans proper
" Is transferred so as to enable the hus-
band TO mortgage the same for his own
benefit are to be so construed as TO defeat
all contrivances or shifts by her and her
husband to eVade the statute prohibiting
married woman from becoming a surety, etc.
T. Where one has knowledge of facts suffi-
clent TO excite the attention of a person OF
ordinary prudence and put him upon fur
ther inquiry he is required TO make such
inquiry In good faith and with diligence,
and in the absence of so doing he will be
chargeable with the knowledge of the par
ticular point or fact which such inquiry
would have revealed or impaired.
2O25I. C., c., c. & St l.. Ry Co. VS.. Berg
schicker. Henry c. c. Reversed Gillett,
c. il Where an action is commenced
within the limitation period for a personal
injury additional paragraphs of complaint
may be filed after the expiration of such
limitations when throughout the whole
proceedings but one action appears and the
character OF the demand remains the same.
When 1t becames the duty of the trial
court TO construe rule regulating the
conduct OF one of the litigants, if it appears
on its face to be irrelevant to the case, the
court should refuse to permit Ii TO go in
evidence. 8. In constituting written instru-
ments general words following the mention
of particular person or thing are ordi-
narlly TO be construed ejusdem generis.
2O2O6; Wabash r. r. Co. VS.. Young. Mi
ami G. c. Reversed. Bowling, il. An
act of the Legislature can embrace but one
subject and matters properly connected
herewith. which subject must be expressed
braced in an act which is not expressed in
It's title, such act is void as to so much
thereof as is not expressed in Its title. 2. An
employe who has voluntarily left the serv-
Ice OF company Is not projected by the
act of March 9, 1899. (Acts 1889 %. 315: being
Section 1077, Burns, 1S94)
Minute
2O21. Perry Bradburn VS. State of Indi-
ana. Hamilton c. c. Appellants brief (S)
Rulings
2O112 Benjamin L. Webb eft al. VS.. John
Hancock Mutual Life Insurance Company.
Marion c. G, Reversed in part Jordan, j.
2O206 Wabash Railroad Company vs.
John w Young Miami c. c. Reversed.
2O257. c., c.. c. & st. L. Ry. Co. VS.. John
w Bergschlicker. Henry c. c. Reversed.
(4S27) Henry C. Kimble ct al. VS.. Board
of Commissioners of Franklin County Fay
cite 9 c. Petition to remove to Supreme
Court denied.
APPELLATE COURT.
1857. Z. & T. II. r. r. Co. VS. Kevekordes
Rnh 4
parties between themselves fix the value of
property to be transported by contract, free
ly and fairly made and supported by good
consideration, the value SO fixed may be
made the measure of the carriers liability
2. When shipper sues upon n written con-
tract and seeks to be relieved from a GER
tam clause thereof, upon the ground that it
Is without consideration, he must establish
such allegation or fail in excluding such
clause serviceable though it be.
1895. BoSworth VS. City of Anderson. Mad
ison c. c. Reversed. Black, J.-Reversed
upon authority of No. 1895. decided at this
term.
Fayette G. c. Petition to remove to Su-
preme Court denied
1900. Dairy Co. VS.. Brudi Allen S. C.
Appellants petition for court to approve
bond Overruled.
Minutes
5O57. Henry Rutherford. administrator. VS..
Prudential Insurance Company of America
Perry c. C. Appellee's brief 90 and motion
10 ulSIllSS.
1914. Lake Erie & Western Railroad Com
pany VS.. Melissa McFall. Hamilton c. c.
Appellants reply brief 90
1866. Bernard H. Rem ct al VS. United
States Cement Company. Jefferson c. c.
Appellee's brief (S)
Rulings
1850. Frank S. Paul VS.. The 3. & O. Rail-
road Company. Steuben c. c. Affirmed
Beck, j.
1851. Evansville & Terre Haute Railroad
Company VS.. Glenn II. Kevekordes ct al
Posey c. G. Reversed. Roby, J.
1927. Henry c. Kimble ct al. VS. Board
of Commissioners of Franklin County
Fayette c. G. Appellee's petition to remove
to Supreme Court denied.
1890. Mondamin Meadows Dairy Company
VS.. Henry G. Brudi ct al. Allen c. c. Ap-
pellants petition for court TO approve bond
overruled
1895. Isaac d. Bosworth VS.. City of An
derson ct al Madison c. c. Reversed
Black, j.