The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1905-09-28
|NOIMORECASES
T0'..B|||E |. DECID ] | |.
Supreme Court Handed Down
Fours Opinions. On TIES
day.
WAS IA MATTER Of 2 EADlNGs
CourtlApprovess Of Practi al
lowing Additional Plead:
During Vacation. 5f$I
l(speclal e rhe rimes-Dls pntoh.)

Z b
special to The Times-D lspntch.) 4
sT'AUNTON, VA, Sept. 27,--Upon Its i
adjournment Tuesday, the Supreme Court
OF Appeals handed down four opinions,
No more cases Will DO decided now by
tho court until It meets in Richmond In
November next. "a ID 3s3 N n, ~
Iii Risques administrator VS.. Chesn-
penkc and Ohio Railway Company, Judge
Harrison handed down an opinion af--t
nrnling the Judgment OF Rockingham Cir
cut Court, In fuvor Of the railway COM
.pany upon its demurrer to the evidence.
In Il collision at the crossing Of, tho
track 4 OF the Allegheny Ore and slir Iron
Company and the main line Of the, Clles-
;ipeako and OHIO, near Buena Vista
.Risqtc the engineer Of tho Orc and Iron
Company was fatally injured, and his
administrator brough. suit against the
Chesapeake and Ohio for damages. TheA
evidence showed that while making
flying switch OH tho yard OF the orc
and Iron Company, Risque backed ms Is
engine upon tho main line Of the 9. 81 ana
Q. with his back to athe track, 80 that
lie could not see, at a tlme when ne
knew u passenger ruin was due at S}s'1e 1lla
Vista and could not reach there except
by passing oyer the eros slng upon le wMcn
came into collision with the passenger
train which was passing, and Idsque
received the injuries from which he died.
The court holds that this can only 20
characterize d as reckless IL not Wa1lton,
Railway, Colg2was guilty Of the negli-
gence charged, the contributory ncgll-
gence Of Risque would preclude q re-
5covcry. s 5Jfl$ sg9gs a Ell 3iSa . t{i s.F
SIT is also held that the court prop
ri tts,,ar n.
counts in tho declaration which charged
the Chesapeake and Ohio with negligence
In furnishing the Ore and Iron Company
with cars without, Dr with, unsound,t
brakes. ,5E Il
Matter Of Pleadings.
The decision in. Norfolk and Yves tern
Railway Company VS. Coffey, from RocK-
5ingham Circuit Court, relates s., enlire!y
10 the matter OF pleadings The court
approves ofatho practice OF allowing at az
aditional plcadngs toSEbe filed In vaca-
Gtion. after a case has been mai ured 1oT
trial ut rules and docketed.s SAYING that
though therels no statutory sancllon aIoI
limitations, 1t Is not9only unobJection-
able but tends to prevent surprise. ana
facilitates the preparation Of cases Tor
tral: but opposing counsel should al
ways be given notice OF applcatloh LOT
leave to file such pleadings 4. +. "
I'm the case under consideration It IS
said to be apparent that both court
and counsel were taken by surprise i Ct
tho reliance by defendant Aupon the sIal,
ute of limitations pleas Of when had
been filed by permission $50 Oh souti nv
3cumstances 1t would have been 3impT re- per
to have sustained that defense. It IS
held that the court should, OF It's own
motion, have set aside the demurrer ipy
defendant to the evidence and the award
~. n
the Issues to be made I'M on tho pleas
tnrS,thc statute offlmitations, ordered a
now trial of the cnse. For error, the re-
fore in disregarding the pleas overrullns
Sthe demurrer and rehtlerllls 1--WE "
for tho plaintifr, tho Judgment OF the
lower court Is reversed and the cause
rcmandcd for "a new trial. The opinion5is
by Judge @Whittlc. ~ Ii a
A Life Estate.
Judge Harrison handed down the opin,
others, from Augusta Circuit Court.
house and lotion Frederick Street IN tho
i5cty Of staunton, in which MIS-. htse 4, r.
| N. Stout claimed q fee simple estate IN ",
der the will Of her husband JONI w y,
,terest under husbands Will had ALREADY
bee determined by the Circuit Court !, OF
Augusta county, in May. 1872 70 pc lile
estate In what remaineu nIter - me a1 i paS
l5istrntion: and that Its decree OF Decemper
| q 1884 ordering the cause to be stricken
from M the docket, with leave reserved to
any party thoretojto relnstato tle sa ems
and seek any proper relief at the 81, 1872 .
standing the last clause, There are but
two ways known ito law, II IS said, Dy
which this decree could be set aside q, one
by Bill OF review in tho court which rem en-
Gssrn1 III, and the other by appeal to the
s,nremc Court, and mel Their. was resort
ed to within the time limited by statute.
Tho decree of the lower court is there
fore affirmed. M
Lower Court Reversed,
| In Clark VS.. Roller, from tho Circuit
Court Of Rockingham county Judge EBti-