The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1904-05-25
HIGHER COURTS RECORD.
SUPREME COURT.

9O31s. Cambridge Lodge ETC. VS.. Routh.
Henry G. G. Affirmed. Jordan. G. il.
Where a joint error is assigned for the
overruling of demurrers to several para
graphs of answer all such paragraphs must
be bad or no available error is not present
ed by such assignment 2 In the absence
either express or implied, a suit for use
and occupation of real estate cannot be
from Special ndns of facts OF cannot be-
supplied by intendment. 4. The failure 10
find a fact in favor of the party upon whom
the burden of proof rests is equivalent to
an express finding against him as to that
fact. 5. A new trial as of right is not
demandable where a paragraph of COM
plant is added for which new trial as of
right is not awarded by the statute
20SlS. Booz VS.. Lang. Huntington c. c.
Affirmed. Jordan, c. il. Where one is
shown to have received the money of an
other and has not the right in equity or
good conscience TO retain It, in an action 10
recover IL by the true owner a privity will
be implied between him and the receiver
as well as the promise 10 pay 2 The Ngist
of an action upon an ordinary count for
money had and received is the receipt
of the money by the defendant for the use
of plaintiff. g. Where the clerk is directed
of exceptions the evidence is not in the rec
ord when he certifes the original bill.
@l76. Sewers vs. c., R. M. Railroad
J.-Where there is an appeal taken to the
Circuit Court in proceeding under Sec
tons 3bZS ct seq. Burns, 1901, to open streets
in a city the proceeding may be dismissed
before trial.
2OSS7. Southern Indiana Railway Com
pany VS.. McCassen Orange C G At
firmed. Hadley, il. Where a railroad
company maintains crossing in a danger
Gus condition an unreasona bic time IN is
liable for damages resulting from an injury
for which such defective crossing is the
proximate cause 2. railroad company
must not only construct, but must keep its
crossings and approaches In a safe and
suitable condition for the use of travellers
g. Where a party appears 10 a summons
and files his affidavit and motion for q
change of venue he thereby names the i'm
perfection in the certificate to the trans
cript and submits TO the jurisdiction of the
court
2033O. Towles VS.. McCurdy Hendricks C.
c. Reversed. Bowling, il. The statute for
bidding the disclosure of confidential COM
munications 70 physician. except by
waiver, extends TO all communications
made by patients TO physicians in the course
OF their professional business. 10 all ad-
wise given. and TO all information acquired
by the physician by observation or other
wise by means of his professional relation
10 MS patient and in his professional inter
course with him. =. All that the physician
sees, CT observes. is as fully within the
statute forblddfng disclosure of confidential
communications as matters which are COM
municated 10 him by his patient
pS42- Harbaugh VS.. Tanner. Fountain
g G. Affirmed. Monks, il. Whether or
not married woman is surety or principal
on proInissory note is to be determined
from inquiring whether she received in
person or In benefit TO her separate estate
the consideration upon which the contract
depends =. 1t Is only TO the extent that
married woman receives consideration of
promissory note or other obligation.