The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1904-06-08
HIGHER COURTS RECORD.
SUPREME COURT.

1852. State of Indiana VS.. Chenoweth.
Clinton c. c.. Affirmed. Jordan, c. il.
directs verdict for defendant, acquitting
him upon the evidence the indictment can
not be received on appeal. 2. In a State
case where the trial was had at the Septem-
Der term and the defendant discharged by
order of court without day and no time
given the State beyond the term for filing
q bill of exceptions, the bill is not in the
record when filed on the second judicial day
of the next term.
2O2SS Davis VS.. Lumber Company. Black
ford c. c. Transferred to Appellate Court.
2os9o In re- P etittion OF Pailey VS.: Bank;
till final hearing.
2O3O1 In re. petition of Daley VS.. Bank.
Daviess G.. c. Motion to dismiss postponed
till final hearing.
(l523) Union. etc, Insurance Company VS..
Loughmiller. Floyd c. c. Removal TO Su-
preme Court denied.
1880 c.. c., c. & st. L. R'y Co. VS.. Was
son. Marion S. G. Removal to Supreme
Court denied.
2OSO1. In the matter of the petition of
John Daily, county assessor, for writ
show papers, etc. of William A. Meredith.
Answer to motion to dismiss. Motion to
dismiss postponed until final hearing.
2o2SS. Walter NJ. Davis VS.. Mercer Lum-
Der Company, Appellee's brief 8) Petit
ton for certiorari. Transferred to Appel
late Court Blackford c. c.
2021S. Pittsburg, Cincinnati, Chicago &
st. Louis Railway Company VS.. George
Lightheiser. Appellee's brief 60 on motion
to dissolve Injunction. Cass c. c.
APPELLATE COURT.
1871 Mariotte VS.. Bremen. Allen c. c.
Affirmed Henley, J.-Where the only con-
tention in this court is that there was no
evidence TO sustain the averments of the
complaint on a finding for plaintiff and the
record shows a direct conflict OF the evil
~
fact to be determined by the jury alone.
1912 White VS.. Cincinnati, etc, Company.
Wayne c. C.. Reversed. Robinson, il
1t is not necessary TO introduce in evidence
an object or article which may be complete
ly land accurately described by parol proof.
2. This court may examine maps and pho
tographs introduced in evidence, along with
the oral testimony TO understand what the
witnesses meant. 3. In condemnation pro-
ceedingS when there are buildings on the
land, they must be paid for as part OF the
realty and the cost of their removal forms
no part of the damages 10 be assessed 10
the land owner. 4. Where a part of a tract
of land is taken, in such proceeding, the
owner is entitled to the value of the land
actually appropriated and any injury 10 the
residue naturally resulting from the APP
preparation and the construction and opera
ton of the road or way thereon. ). What
ever the owner puts upon land with the in
tention that IL should remain upon the land
and is essential TO the use he makes of IL,
goes with the land upon a sale thereof 6.
of the land and being essential for the pur-
pose for which the land was used. so far
as the owner is concerned. is a fixture.
1870 Indianapolis Street-railway Com
pany VS.. Earring. Johnson G.. c. Reversed.
Wiley. J.-Where a person is riding a
bicycle and approaching a street-railway
crossing, he is guilty OF negligence il he
fails To look and listen for an approaching
car which is i'm plain view and can be heard
In time To avoid collision.
474 Crown oil Company VS.. Ward.
Grant 9. C.-Judgment set aside and opin-
ion withdrawn. Set for oral argument
June %. 1904.
4S47 Indiana. etc, Torpedo Company VS..
Glass Company. Madison s. Coral argu-
ment postponed 10 June 2S. 1904
5o52. Ardery VS.. Smith. Jennings c. c.