The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1912-03-12
LEGAL

that switch Held, sufficient complaint
and promise to relieve plaintiff of the
| assumed risk
4. Upon the facts stated in the preced-
| ing paragraph, held, that the division
roadmaster stood in relation to the plain
| tiff as a vice-principal of the defendant
| and that whether or not plaintiff was
warranted in relying upon the promise
| was for the jury.
5. The question whether or not under
all the circumstances of this case the
time which elapsed between the promise
and the accident reasonable time
for the performance of the promise was
for the jury to determine.
6. Where complaint is made and the
servant is assured that 1t is the intention
of the master to remove the danger and,
! relying upon such assurance, the servant
continues in the work, the fact that the
master had other reasons than the SAFETY
of the servant for making the change, or
that before the complaint he had intended
to make it, will not render the promise
Intellectual
7. The court refused to approve a YER
dict for $4,000 for the loss of leg, and
required the plaintiff to remit $4,000 rem
dering judgment for $4,000. Held, there
being nothing to show that the excessive
amount was caused by passion or preJu-
dice of the jury, the judgment Will not be
set aside.
Smith, J., and Benson, j., concurr1ng.
Porter J.. and West, j., dissenting
A true copy.
Attest: d. A. VALENTINE,
ISeaLl Clerk Supreme Court.
No 1891
The Illinois Title &. Trust Company, APP
pellant.
P. H. Mccoy. James $. Griggs dnter;
venor), Appellee, (Helen Armstrong and
Walter Mccoy, Appellants
Appeal from Finney County
Judgment Reversed and Order of Revivor
Affirmed.
Syllabus BY the Court. Benson, J.
/. On motion of the defendant in an
action brought by an indorsee of two
promissory notes against the maker
thereof the payee of the notes was
made party and filed an an
swer that the notes sued upon had
been transferred by him to the plain
tiff as collateral security for his own
notes which had been obtained from him
without consideration and through fraud
upon false representations upon pre-
tended sale of a right under letters pat
emit The court submitted to the jury the
question whether the principal notes were
that if the jury so found the Verdlct
should be for the intervenor for the
amount due upon the collateral notes,
otherwise that the verdict for the same
amount should be for the plaintiff, and
instructed the jury, Gas the fact was) that
there was no evidence of any fraudulent
representa tions respecting the patent
right 1t was shown that the right had
been conveyed as agreed in consideration
for the principal notes, and there was no
evidence that it was invalid or worthless
1t is held that verdict and judgment
for the intervenor for the amount of the
collateral notes sued upon can not be
sustained.
g A suit was commenced in Illinois
where the three notes given for the pat
ent right above referred to were made
payable in a court of competent jurisdic-
ton by the payee thereof for the amount
due upon two of them which had not
been transferred and also for the amount
due Ilpon the other note which had been
returned to the payee by the indorsee
thereof for collection and accounting of
the proceeds, and which was secured by
the endorsement and transfer of the col
lateral notes sued upon in this action. A
Judgment was duly rendered in that ac-
ton against the maker of the principal
notes for the full amount thereof. These
are the same notes alleged in the answer
of the maker thereof,-the interVenor in
this action-to have been obtained by
fraud and without consideration. Tt is
determination of the validity of the prin-
cipal notes.
g. Pending an appeal taken by the
plaintiff the principal defendant died and
a motion was made to revive the action
against certain persons to whom, it was
alleged in the motion. the deceased had
transferred money and property, to pre-
vent the plaintiff from collecting its claim
in this action revivor was not asked
against the personal representatives of
had been appointed. A revivor was or
dered against the heirs of the deceased
including the alleged trustees who were
also heirs. On appeal by the alleged
trustees or holders of the funds and
property referred to, the order of -evivor
is affirmed.
f. The liability of the principal de-
PENDANT having been admitted and eStab-
lished by the Judgment referred to in the
second paragraph and the only issue be-