The daily telegram. [volume] (Clarksburg, W. Va.) 1901-1926, 1914-06-20
SYILABlJSES
of Some Appeal Cases Recent
ly Decided by the State
Supreme Court.

Recent state supreme court sylla-
buses are as follows:
Hill vs.. Morton ct al, Ohio county,
Judgment affirmed. Judge Lynch.
i. An erroneous ruling upon a
demurrer to each of two counts in
a declaration, one of which is insult
ficient, is not alone ground for re-
versal, IL plaintiffs evidence was
admissible under the good count and
was sufficient to sustain the cause OF
action averred therein.
2. Permission by the munich
patty to construct and maintain a
coal vault under and an opening
thereto in city pavement will be
presumed from acquiescence and use
continued for several years.
8. A lot owner who maintains y
coal hole In city pavement as an
by him or not, must exercise reason
able care in keeping it in reason-
ably safe condition for use by the
public as part OF the sidewalk.
Whatever the public safety reason
ably requires is the measure of dill
gence to be exercised by him.
4. If he knows, or by the exercise
of reasonable diligence would have
known, the grating over coal hole
in the sidewalk in front of his prop
erty was defective, and failed to re-
pair 1t, he is liable for an injury re-
sulting therefrom to a pedestrian
lawfully using the sidewalk.
5. He remains liable for injuries
to pedestrian resulting from a de-
fective coal hole grating in pave
ment, when appurtenant to the prem
ises, whether occupied in whole or
in part by tenants, If the defect
therein existed at the date of the de-
mise.
s. A grant of lot abutting on
a city street vests title to coal vault
under and an opening in a pavement,
though the terms not expressly in
Guiding either of them. Such title is,
however. subject to the easement OF
the public for street purposes.
Z. A pedestrian is not guilty OF
contributory negligence solely be-
cause he steps on coal eIating in a
public sidewalk.
8. At the expiration OF tenancy,
whether with or without actual
change of possession, a landlord may
lawfully enter and make necessary
repairs; and his neglect so to do rem
ders his liability for injuries result
ting from defects then existing in
the premises demised.
8. Unless brought to its atten-
ton by special bills or exception, or
upon a motion for a new trial, spe-
officially stating as grounds therefore
the admission or rejection of evil
dence, this court will not consider
the rulings of the trial court there
on.
10. The trial court properly ruled
on the instructions requested by the
parties hereto.
IL. To sustain finding in his
favor, it is not essential there should
be a distinct preponderance of evil
dence on behalf of the plaintiff. To
have this effect 1t is only necessary
that the evidence, when considered
in Its entirety, reasonably justifies
such verdict.
IL. This court will not grant a
new trial where the evidence is vol
luminous and conflicting, unless pal
pably insufficient to sustain the YER
dict, or the amount clearly evinces
Partially, prejudging or passion on
the part OF the jury or that they
were misled by some mistaken view
Of the merits Of the case.
Caretta Railway Co. VS.. Fisher ct
al, Mcdowell count, modified and af-
frmed.
1. A tract OF land owned by CO.
tenants can not lawfully be assessed
to them separately by undivided in
terests. or separately by aliquot
parts representing their undivided
interests, and tax sale depending
on such assessment of any undivided
interest Is void.
2. Though such unlawful assess
ment is made. still II all of the land
is actually entered in that manner
and the owners waive the irregu-
tarity and pay all the taxes on the
and by such assessment, forfeiture
for non-entry does not follow.
8. II it is undertaken to assess
land separately by undivided inter-
ests therein, or separately by aliuuot
parts representing the undivided in
terests, and any undivided interest
Is omitted for a period of FIVE con-
secutive years. the title OF the entire
tract will become forfeited and vest
In the state. Notwithstanding entry
and payment may have been made as
to other undivided interests
4. A tax deed purporting on It's
face to convey an undivided inter-
est in yand other than town lot,
is unauthorized by law, imperative,