Omaha daily bee., 1905-07-17

Gated on the giving OF an instruction which
- similar I'm substance 20 one reuuesteu
by the party complaining, and given oy 'he
1886. western Travellers Accident Assg-
citation against Tomson. Error, lances'els
the district court affirmed. Ames, G. d.
!. A plaintiff may, subject to liability
iis petition matter ip avoidance OF an an
uoiPated defense and may supplement the
consistent herewith.
q Pleadings after verdict and judg-
mberally constituted P'f for the purpose Of
upholding the result reached by the court
s II an insurance company sued for an
alleged loss denies the loss. 1t valves
proof OF notice OF the same.
II an insurance company has actual
knowledge Of a loss within the time stipu-
lated In the policy for the giving OF formal
notice thereof, such notice ls dispensed
1882 Eddy against omaha. Appeal.
Douglas, On second motion for rehearing.
l. Under the statute governing cities of
the metropolitan class, property owners or
g paving district must be allowed thirty
the ordinance declaring tho Improvement
necessary in which to designate by petition
II a petition signed by the property own
ers representing a majority OF taxable
foot frontage designating the material to
be used is filed the mayor and council
will not lose Jurisdiction OF the proposed
Improvement by acting upon such petition
no other petition is filed within that time
from which It appears that the necessary
number Of property owners have within the
thirty days designated another material.
2 The president OF corporation Is the
proper party to sign petition for repay
nature will not be held invalid as unnu-
thori1ed although the board Of directors
took no action thereon. II II appears from
the evidence that It had for some time
prior to such signing been customary for
the president to sign such petitions on be-
half Of the corporation without express
authority from the directors, and that the
directors knew of this custom and CON
that the president had signed the petition
In question, and made no objection thereto
until the Improvement had been entered
upon relying upon the validity OF such
signature to bind the corporation.
8. The Board OF Education OF the school
District OF Omaha may authorize It's pres
ideU to sign such petition i'm the name OF
the board, and the signature OF the board
by its president pursuant TO such authority
4. II Is the duty Of the city council TO pro-
| vide available funds with which to nay for
| street intersections before ordering the Inn
| provcment. But after the improvement Is
| made and the intersections actually paid
! for by the city, special assessments against
| AUDITING property cannot be enioined on
| the ground that this fund with which to
| pay for the street intersections was not
available at the time the Improvement was
1890 SNYDER against Sparks Appeal from
| Holt. Affirmed oldham G. Division No. l.
! /. To enforce a mechanics lien for ma
| terial. labor, etc, used in nm Improvement
| on real estate, the evidence must show
that the contract for such material or labor
was made with the owner OF the premises
! or his duly authorized agent Moore ct al
v. Vaughn ct al, AZ Neb,, 500, followed and
| approved.
2. Evidence examined and held sufficlent
! TO sustain the judgment OF the trial court
| 1875. George against Peckham. Appeal
| from Lincoln. Reversed and dismissed.
| A>rcs. C. Division No. I.
! !. The process of injunction cannot be
awaited OF by a private citizen to abate a
| purely public nuisance from which he suf-
! fers no special or peculiar injury Of a con-
| tinuing nature. for which an action at law
| will afford him no adequate remedy or re-
dress.
2. 1t is not enough to confer jurisdiction
| upon equity that the plaintiff has suffered
| damages special and peculiar to himself
and in which the public docs not share. but
| as to be incapable Of being measured and
| compensated In damages.
| 3. Damages to an individual are not rem
! dered special or peculiar within the mean
Ing Of the above mentioned rule by the fact
| that they exceed those inflicted upon the
| general public in degree. but to have that
| character they must diner from the latter
| In kind
1875 Kenneth against Randall Appeal
| from Nemaha. Affirmed. DUNE, c. Divi-
| sion No. q
| Alleged erroneous rulings in the trial OF
case In the court below regarding the re-
| lection or admission of evidence will not
| N. proceedings by appeal, be reviewed In
! this court. OH. ~. --.f# 1-- -.-E. 81