The Montgomery advertiser., 1909-01-14
Head Notes Of the Decisions
 of fhe Alabama Supreme Court


 shaft. he must show . duty owing him by the foreman whose order caused ths hoist to be lowered, breach of such duty and consequent injury therefrom.
 .z. same: duty of foreman.--The evil dence in this case ts stated and ex- amined and held fnsufifcient to show ftnat It was the duty of the foreman directing the hoist in the elevator snaft to see that no empioye was In or on the shaft before ordering the hoist to be raised or lowered, and, therefore. insufficient to show any neg itgence towards an employe Injured by the descending hoist.
 Appeal from Mobile Law and Equity ICort.
 Heard before Hon. saffoid Berney.
 Reversed and remanded. Opinion by Mcclellan. J.
 Tyson. c. J.. and Dowdsii and An- derson. JJs concur.
 KRESS. EFT AL vs. LAWRENCE Damages for Assault and Battery
 SDecided, Nov. ls. 1sos.---47 South
 1. Trial; instructions bad in form An instruction requiring . finding for aefendant on a named count is bad in form, and its refusal proper. ?. Same; instructions misleadipr - Where misloadiug instructions are given reversal will not be had. the duty being on the other party to re- quest explanatory instructions. '. Same; assumption of fact.-A charge asserting that defendant, while ne might not be liable for islander in this case. might be liable fer an ar rest under the charge of smeezxle- ment. and that In considering that question the jury might consider all the evidence as to what was said and done at the time. does not assume as fact that an arrest was made under the charge of indictment, and was not erroneous as invading the province Of the jury.
 {. Same: instructions: false swear inR.--A charge asserting that if the Jury were reasonably satisfied from the evidence that one or more wit. nesses willfuIiy swore falsely iu any material particular. they could reject the testimony of that witness or those witnesses entirely was a proper charge.
 s. Assault and battery; dnmaxes.- Punitive damages are recoverable against the owner of the store for the wrongful act of Its manager in for. cioiy and publicly searching . sales wcrnan's pocket for money he claimed she had enbesxled. and which. before the search. she told him he would find In the cash carrier where she had placed 1t to be sent to the cashiers desk.
 6. Same; excessive verdict: liam. ages.--A verdict for $500 is not sxces- sive where the facts tend to show that the manager of defendant forcibiy and publicly searched . seieswonan's embezzied and which she told him would be found in the cash carrier where she had placed it to be aent to the cashiers desk.
 Appeal from Birmingham City Court
 Heard before Hon. c. ". Ferguson.
 Affirmed. opinion by Dowdeil |.
 Tyson. c. J.. Anderson and MeCiei- Ian. JJ., concur. UNION IRON WORKS co. vs UNION
 NAVAL STORES co N Trover. Decided Nov, 12. 1s08.--s7
 1. Evidence: documentary evidence; effect of tntroducing--Where a docu- ment is offered in evidence, as c gem eral rule. it must be taken in It's entira- ty, the parts operating against the party offering it. as we'll as the parts in his favor: and hence, whore plain l tiff introduced notes given 1t for the purchase price of property and con- taining . clause retaining title in said property, and on the back of which I were endorsements of the plaintiff by I It's president transferring the notes, I the debts evidenced thereby and the property described. to another person, such endorsenaents were . part of the note and became evidence upon their 
 2. Corporations; 0ffieers: authority to endorse notes.-the president of the had the authority to en- dorse notes of the corporation given for accounts, thereby passing title thereto, where the bylaws of the cor poration gave the president manage ment and control of the corporate busi' ness and property under the direction of the board of directors. and by an agreement among the stockholders. directors and officers, all the corpora ton accounts. including notes. were turned over to . trustee. 6. Trover: rights of action; right to corporation has neither a general or special right to the property upon which to maintain an action of trover, where, prior to the alleged conversion of the property. It has transferred the notes retaining title to the property In question to an- other. Appeal from Monroe Circuit Court.
 Heard before Hon. John T. LAckland. Affirmed. opinion by Dowdell. J.
 Tyson, c. J., Anderson and McClel. Ian, JJ.. concur.
 BENTON V. CLEMENS. Nov. IS. 190s.--47
 South. 5S2)
 1. Alteration of instrument; effect.-- A material alteration of an instrument. ,y one not stranger thereto, renders kAaa