Evening times-Republican. [volume] (Marshalltown, Iowa) 1890-1923, 1905-01-02
1@@4@@@18@@ @@@@V@Vyy
! 1mportant Decisions :
PERSONAL INJURIES.


ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
PERSONAL INJURIES.
Defendants building superintendent
while riding in passenger elevator
moved the elevator boys stool with.
out the latters knowledge, and he, or
losing his balance, while attempting
to sit down, cutched involuntarily al
the elevator lever, which started the
elevator and caused injury to plaintiff
a passenger therein. Action was
brought for damages. Held, that the
proximate cause of the injury was
the elevator boys act in clutching the
lever, which was a mere accident, and
not the act of the superintendent in
moving the stool. Gibson VS.. Trust Co
IL N. e. II (Mass)
VACCINATION.
Realtors boy, a lad of 10 years OF
age, had been in regular attendance at
one of the public schools in the coun-
ty of Queens, and the principal, pur-
suant to the instructions Of the board
of education, had excluded him
therefrom, because he refused to be
vaccinated. The laws of New York
provide that no pupil shall be admit
ted to any public school until vacci-
mated. Relator applied for writ OF
mandamus to compel the board of edu-
cation to readmit the boy. Held, that
| the courts will take judicial notice OF
the fact that it is common belief OF
the people of the state that vaccination
is a preventative of smallpox, and that
| the law above referred to, excluding
children not vaccinated from the pub
lie schools until vaccinated, is
health law, enacted in the reasonable
exercise of the police power. Viemes-
| ter VS.. White, " N. r. 81 IN. 70
! PERSONAL INJURIES.
Plaintiff rented house of defendant
and claimed that at the time she rent
ed the house there was walk leading
from the house to an clubhouse in the
rear of the lot, which walk was danger
Gus, and that the landlord had promis-
ed to repair same, but failed SO to do.
In walking over this walk she fell and
was injured. Held, that inasmuch as
plaintiff had knowledge of the defect
she could not recover. Hedek1n VS..
Gillespie, " N. E. 143 Gndo
ELECTIONS-CON
The county committee Of a political
party duly called a convention at
certain time and place. The conven-
ton regularly organized, and placed in
nomination candidates. A contesting
delegation claimed that they were ex-
cluded from participation In the con-
vention, and thereupon nominated GER
tain other nominees, which they Claim,
ed were entitled to the party designa-
ton on the official ballot. The county
convention was regularly called to orr
der and opportunity given to contest
ants to present their credentials. The
contesting delegates made no attempt
to be admitted by presenting their
credentials. but proceeded to organize
another convention. Held. that the
nominees Of the Independent conven-
ton were not entitled to have their
names placed on tire official ballot in
stead of the nominees Of the regular
convention.
Riley vs.. Weston, 7S Pac. 4S7 (Mont)
LANDLORD AND TENANT.
PLAINTIFFS husband rented rooms pm
condition that the landlord would G ht
a door to open on porch to be erected
at the rear Of the rooms, and to AID
join a previously constructed porch in
the rear of the next adjoining roonhs;
but there was no agreement that plat n-
tiffs husband was to occupy any of
the porch other than that back of his
own rooms, nor did it appear that the
landlord had reserved the porch back
of the adjoining rooms for common
USE Plaintiff. while using the latter
was injured. Held, that plaintiff mfak-
ing use Of that portion Of the porch
| back of the adjoining rooms, walls a
mere licensee, and could not receiver
for injuries owing to the defective DON
dition Of that portion of the porch,
| Flaherty VS.. Nieman, 1O1 N. WI 2SO
| 0owa).
! RIGHTS OF CROPPER
One M being owner Of farm, leas-
| ed the same upon shares to PLAINTIFF by
an instrument of writing. This lease
gave plaintiff the right to exclusive
possession of the farm, except "the
| wheat fields now in wheat, and the
right to go on and harvest the Isa11e
next season" At the time the lease
was made, the wheat fields mentioned
had a growing crop upon them, ,sown
by defendant as cropper, by author
ity of M. This wheat turned out poor
ly, and defendant being Of the Opinion
that portions Of it were not worth har-
vesting, desired to SOW oats upon the
ground. He had conversation with M.
and the plaintiff The former was in
doubt regarding his right to authorize
1t, while the latter denied it and re-
| fused to allow defendant to do 80. De-
PENDANT sowed the oats, however He
harvested them and drew them away
upon Sunday, to avoid the service OF
any process to prevent it. Plaintiff
brought this action to recover for the
conversion of the oats. Held. that when
defendant entered and sowed oats he
was a trespasser, and under the lease
defendant had only the right TO make
and harvest crop of wheat Steb-
bins VS.. Demorest, IL DIN, 564
| (Mieh.).
PERSONAL INJUFIEa.
Plaintiff, lineman in de- Drdant's
employ, was injured by being thrown
from pole by the recoil of cable
while lifting it from one ins1 pr to
another. In order to do u (ork.
plaintiff stood on on a tower gon
underneath the arm Of t,ae p on
which the cable rested, with o pot
on a brace supporting the PR I'd
4 MADE IN OUR lKITCE]