The Cairo bulletin., 1905-01-06
lusurance-ownership.

Defendant is an insurance company
and issued policy of fire Insurance
on all tho household furniture in .he
house occupied by painth Part Of
his property was owned by the plain
tin and part Of It she held under con
ditional ownership. i. having been
purchased under the installment plan.
The policy contained q clause thai.
the policy shall be void II the inter.
est of the insured be other han i'm.
conditional and ole ownership. IN
less other ownership be assented to
in writing. The properly was DESTROY
ed and plaintiff brought suit. In the
lower court verdict was directed in
her favor for the value OF the proper.
ty which she owned absolutely Held,
that the policy was void and plaintiff
was not entitled to recover either for
The property she owned herself or
the property purchased by her I'M
der the installment plan Dow VS..
National Insurance Company IS Att.
999 CIR. ID
Criminal Law-Statutes.
The defendant, colored man.
about G5 years of age, was indicted
for pretending to exercise the an of
dealing with spirits. The charge
made against him was that he mad
pretended 10 different persons that
they were under the influence OF some
evil spirit and thar he alone hal
power to remove such evil spirits
and cure sickness caused by sucn
spirits. The laws of Delaware pro
vide. that ii any percon shall pretend
10 exercise The art of witchcrafi, Goa
luraticn, fortune telling. or dealing
with spirits. he shall be fined. etc
Held. shat the actions Of he defend
ant came within the terms OF this
statute, and deGendants conviction
IN The lower court was affirmed
State VS. Durham. IS All. 1924 Dela.)
Criminal Law--Licenses.
Defendant, in his store, in East
Florence upon the receipt Of 81 from
one OBrien, let the latter have a
quart of brandy which he defendant /
had bought in Tuscumbia for and at
the request of a third person. that he !
had paid for the brandy 81, waicn the /
third person had supplied for thai
purpose; and that he gave to tina /
third person the dollar handed hin /
by O'Brien Held. that it was imma |
terial whether defendant sold tn |
brandy for che accommodation OF /
.O'Brien or for profit, and that defend /
ant is guilty of violation of he laws
If Alabama prohibiting The sale o.
liquor without a license. Mi;cael VS.
state. 81 So 407 (Ala)
acknowledgement atoms.
Plaintiff sold dc.endan- retail
liquor dealer, a quantity Of whi ks
md defendant Claims thas at The tim
Of the sale plaintiffs agent represent
ID 70 defendaE thai The whisky
would meet the wants Of defendant.
trade. Defendan, executed his note
70 plaintiff for the purchase price. De
PENDANT alleges that the whisky was
unsatisfactory and refused TO paw the
note, whereupon plaintiff instituted
nit. Defendant claimed no liability
on the ground of misrepresentation
Held. that the representation hal the
whisky would meet the wants of de-
PENDANTS trade. were expressions OF
opinions and nor fraudulent misrep
Shiretski VS.. Kesslei
& Co. 81 So. i22 (Ala.)
RaiIrcads-Persons on Track
Deceased, who was car repairer
in dofondorttc op,,,lox bo,in.. to,, |
ordered 20 leave on a passenger train
then approaching, in the day time
started across the track to a too
house to get certain tools. and as he
did SO pa sed in front of switch en-
CINE backing toward him speed
in excess Of that authorized by a
city ordinance and was killed A
the timE deceased stepped on tho
rack the tender of the engine was
ives within xix or seven fec OF him
and there was nothing TO obst"uct hi
view thereof TIE engine vas NAL
ing the usual noise OF exhaust. an
the bell was ringing. Held. that
though deceased had a right 10 eros
he track at the place in question. n
was guilty of cOntributory negligence
as matter Of law. Bennett VS.. s.
Louis S.-W Ry.. 80 S. W 333 (Texas.
Municipal corporations-str
Plaintiff was the owner of about fir
.ech acres Of land situated in the cit.
IF Houston, between DePelchin stree
and White Oak Bayou. In 1893 this
property was laid out in lots and ,
blocks, with spaces left for streets
In March, 1900. plaintiff executed a
leel 10 the city Of Houston. whereby.
n consideration of 81 900. she convey.
~ to the city for street purposes a
strip of land through her property so
'eet wide. and extending from De
Pelchin street 10 the south bank of
White Oak Bayou The purpose of Q
he city in acquiring tais proper,y 8
vas 10 extend H0us on avenue north y
o White OAK Bayou. and across the
bayou By a bridge thereafter TO be
constructed Plsinin knew of the
purpose 10 extend the avenue and I
'ons ruct the bridge. but not of the in. Il
ention TO lower the grade of the a
treet to the detriment of her proper