Evening times-Republican. [volume] (Marshalltown, Iowa) 1890-1923, 1904-12-12
Important Decisions4
STREET IMPROVEMENTS.

| A CITY and owners of property abut-
ting on a street entered into an agree
| ment for the improvement of the
| street. The owners surrendered their
rights to damages resulting from the
Improvement. and they were relieved
from special assessments, the city "a
greeting to pay for the cost Of improve
ment out OF the general fund. The
owners had paid once, and probably
twice, for the improvement of the
street. Held. that the agreement was
not inequitable, and did not authorize
general taxpayer to Interfere, ana
prevent the city from paying the cost
of the Improvement out Of the general
fund Shelly VS.. Burlington, 101 N. w.
1902 Uowa).
CREDITORS.
Defendant and his wife purchased
land, the title to which was taken by
the entirety Gin their joint names) ana
the land became the homestead. Sub
sequently other land was purchased,
the title taken in the same way, and
the homestead and the land last pur-
chased was mortgaged to pay for the
land last purchased. Defendant assign
ed his interest in his fathers estate
to the mortgage to be applied on the
mortgage debt. Plaintiff, a creditor of
defendant. brought attachment pro-
ceedings, claiming that defendant had
assigned a portion of his property with
intent to defraud his creditors. Inc
court directed verdict for defendant
and plaintiff appeals. Held, that de-
PENDANT in purchasing the last prop
erty and assigning his interest IN ms
fathers estate was using individual
property to create an estate by entlrety
at the expense of his creditors, anu
that the question whether or not ne
had disposed of same for the purpose
of defrauding his creditors should nave
been submitted to the jury. Cas"eA
VS.. Pilkinton, II DIN, 519 (Micn.).
1NJUNCT1oNs.
In July, 1904, the common couhcil VI
the city of Pontiac advertised Iol jus
for lighting the city in accoroance
with plans and specifications "nicn
the council had duly adopted. one
Jules G. Hoffman filed bid ana proveo
to be the lowest bidder. The ngntlhs
committee recommended that the con-
tract be awarded to HOFFMAN. res
olution was thereupon adopted py the
common council awarding the contract
to Hoffman. On account OF the Illness
of his father the city attorney coulo
not Immediately prepare the contract,
and no other steps were taken unul
about the 9Th Of August, when MT.
Hoffman appeared before the council
and demanded that a contract be drawn
up and executed. A resolution was
then adopted reconsidering that APP
proving the bid of Hoffman, and MS
bid rejected, and another bid made by
another party was accepted, ana the
mayor and city clerk directed to sign
such contract with the third party.
Thereupon Mr. Hoffman filed bill IN
equity to enjoin the making OF con-
tract with the third party, and praying
that the common council be compelled
to sign a contract in accordance with
the proposal of said Hoffman. A pre-
lminary injunction was issued, which,
upon motion, the court refused to dis
solve. and the mayor and common
council applied for a mandamus 10
compel the dissolution OF the tnjunc-
ton. Held, that without considering
the legal rights Of the parties, so far
as the remedy by injunction is con-
cerned, the rights of the public are par
amount to the rights Of individuals
who claim to stand in the position Of
contractors, and municipalities will not,
except under very extraordinary cir
cumstances be restrained by the
courts.
Riker VS.. Circuit Judge, II D. L. N.
52S (Mich)
GARNISHMENT.
Defendant had recently been dis
charged by the garnishee defendant in
this case, and had requested plaintiffs,
to whom he was indebted to sue him
and garnishee his former employer,
which plaintiffs did. On the hearing
defendant moved for the release of the
money attached by garnishment on the
ground that he was q married man,
and that the sum which was garnished
was due him as personal earnings, and
therefore. exempt under the provisions
o. the code Of Iowa. Held, defendant
was not entitled to have same releas-
ed, he having by his conduct, in effect
directed plaintiffs to sue for his bene-
At.
Bowling VS.. Wood, 1o1 N. W. 11s
,Iowa.)
A Frightened Horse.