The advocate. [volume] (Charleston, W. Va.) 1901-1913, 1910-01-27

fury and induce the BELIEF that trey;
fhRYBIato. right to consider the fact OF
the number OF witneSses.T g ~
fdGSSla. stt Is errorairl the trial OF
such an action for the court, in the
exercisaSSof its discretion, to refuse
Ito submit to the jury on the IA OF lon
! OF the. defendant O special interroga-
tory as TO how much they had includ-
4 ed in their. verdict for actual dun
| ages. orsinI the alternative, how much
1 Yas- ncludRd therein for exemplary
DANA gsS It being one Of the pri-
mary issues in the case, the plaintiff
is aentitledsto know how much MAS
found for damages,hand there
] by tog ascertain the Ganfoulit awarded
for exemplary damages, and to- be
enabled thereby to test the correct
ness sofsthe verdict on motion for
d new tsial.l ;.t ), '.@ AN,
| .h@tt,3 Smith VS.. Root, ct III. :.
| The Rcanc county circuit court
was affirmed by the supreme court
in the case Of Smith VS.. Root, ct al J,
which Involved an oil and. gas lease
an Roanef county. In his syllabus,
Judge Williams says:s,,& ~: ~. x, =. -
i. j.. %55Eqlifye has Jurisdiction of a
suit brought by the senior, Jesse COT
ttana OIL lease a gainst ibis flessoH4atlds a
junior lessee. Of the4SaHfe; land from
the sames lessor, from; the purpose Of
| epjotnines the REMOVAL of, =;the oil
from s the .fleased 'premisesIand tSor
tspecffic execution of?h4s, lease; and;
linlsuc result, the court can settle the
ieonfdctingt claims of the feSsees;; and
gFantt*suchE relief to-. eitfieTs claimant
tas the pleadings and proof may war
rant. 80. ir,@,,>1s;,,:
h,2,. An@ol and gas lease giving the
Jesse etthe right, foe<athe,< period, of
ten. xears. Ito explore. far..Aoil and
fgas,Mandz provided thats.if g. well is
fnotNconpleted ongths, leased premises
wtthin sthRee months fronl~Sydate. of
thagl lease the &lessae shall paytgto the
leSaorye. In advance, .3.54HaEte rfy tCash
ttrsntal for leach additional three
month s,. thassco mpletton Of a. well : is
Iandsyests NO title in the; lessee to the
oil and gas in the place. ,-,-.a,.} !;
3d. Such: a contract contemplates
dayel opm emit Of the leased premises
within a aatime,s and, the
lessee may lose his rights hereunder
before the texpirat ton; Of, the ten
Years by abandonment OF the lease,
netRi MISLEADING there is;&no forfeit
ture. clause IN the contract.
tr,r' T.. yiTI,s LAe, lSSSeS IlttS NOT, dCSudtty
entered upon the land, the rellnquish-
nlent Of hts right to do so, or: his
abandonment, becomes purely Dues
tlon Of his intention, aud may. be es-
tablished by proof Of such facts, and
circumstances as evince voluntary
| waiver Of his rights. = -, T..
| s: "A case in which the evidence
proves a voluntary abandonment of
the lease Blythe lessee---e------ -
Mitchell VS.. Penny.
In the Hancock county circuit
lcourt Ida B. Mitchell brought suit
against Malinda Penny, for money al
tleged to- be- due the plaintiff by the
defendant. The lower court gave
| the judgement in favor the de-
| PENDANT and the supreme court sus-
tanned that judgement. Judge Poff-
lenbafgef wrote the opinion and the
syllabus ga ys:
4. On the termination Of the
guardianship, without a settlement Of
the guardians. accounts, and ascer-
| tainD1ent of the amount due from
him in some appropriate manner,
fan action Of aSsumpsit cannot be
evoked by the, ward to enforcce set
tlement of the accounts and payment
fof the amount remaining in the
guardians. hands,. -: H.. ... .
q. For the purpose Of settlement.
the guardianship is deemed, to con-
tinue after it has, in law, ceased.