The daily telegram. [volume] (Clarksburg, W. Va.) 1901-1926, 1914-07-11
SY|LABUSES'

UIIIHDUULU
syllabuses in eases recently decided
by the state supreme court are as
followsi
Supreme coaft Of the state sylla-
buses recently announced are as fol-
lows:
Smith. admir-. vs.. Sunday Creek
Company; Kanawha county, Judge
Lynch. Judgment reversed, verdict
set aside, and new trial awarded.
i. TO persons induced, allured or
enticed ~ tho owner to enter upon
premises, OF thereon by his express
or implied invitation, he owes a high-
er degree Of care, In having and keep
ling the premises reasonably safe, than
II such persons were mere licensees.
3. An invitation to enter upon
premises, within the meaning Of the
law of negligence, will be implied
where the entry thereon at the in
stance Of the owner is in connection
with his business or for his benefit.
Eailroad Co. vs.. o'Malley, 107 Ill.
APP. 600.
5. A tenant occupying dwelling
and usias Herewith an Clubhouse, on
the promises Of his employer, a coal
company, which as a common carrier
operates railroad through the prem
Uses. located within few feet Of the
dwelling and clubhouse, forty feet
apart, and who uses its track or q
pathway beside 1t as the only reasona-
bly, convenient means of access from
the dwelling to the clubhouse. is.
while making such use of the track or
pathway, neither q trespasser nor a
mere icensee. He is thereon by full
i gal right. And the members Of his
family a.e entitled to like right Of
way.
4. Where, in an action against the
company for the wrongful death of a
child of such tenant and employee. it
Is proved by plaintiff that there was
IN incline in the track past the dwell
ing, and that intestate was killed.
while on the pathway to the out
house, by the sudden starting and
movement down the grade, without
application Of any external force, of a
car by the company thereon two hours
before the accident, unlocked and
with brakes unset, 1t Is error on the
part OF the trial court. without any
proof by the company, to exclude
plaintiffs evidence and direct YER
diet for defendant.
Williams. receiver. VS.. Borgess.,
ct al. Mercer county. Reversed and
remanded. Williams, Judge.
i. In an action by q receiver.
upon note due an insolvent bank.
the maker has a right to set off
against the note money on deposit
In the bank to his credit at the time
the receiver was appointed, notwith-
standing the note was not then due.
and Notwithstanding the bank had
pledged it to secure the payment of a
debt which It owed, and which was
paid out Of proceeds Of other securt-
ties pledged at the same time, and
the note returned to the receiver.
2. When the debt Of an insolyent
bank, thus secured, has been paid
out OF the proceeds Of a portion of
the securities. the remaining ones
become assets of the bank to be adj
ministered by the receiver, and they
are subject to the right of set-off in
favor Of the obligors thereon
against the bank, existing at the date
Of the receivers appointment.
3. That the proceeds of a note.
thus deposited as security, would
have been consumed in payment OF
the debt, II the Pledge had collected
and applied the securities as they be-
came due, does not affect the right of
set-off, after payment of the debt and
return Of the note to the receiver of
the pledgor.
potatoes. $4,000. 900 bushels, and to-
State VS.. Michael, Greenbrier
county, reversed and remanded. VIII
liams. Judge.
!. An instruction. given at the
instance OF the state. in the trial of
an Indictment for murder, where the
accued admits the homicide and
seeks to justify it on the ground Of
self-defense, which excludes from
the consideration of the jury extenu-
ating circumstances showing want of
malice, and which. in effect, tells
the jury that they should find thel
accused guilty of murder in the sec
ond degree. unless they believe hel
had cause to believe, and did believe:
that 1t was necessary to kill deceased
In order to have his own life or him
self from bodily harm, IS prejudicialI
error and calls for the reversal of a |
judgment based on verdict of sec
ond degree murder.
2. A person who has been struck.
by some person unknown to him. a
violent blow, on the head with stone
weighing about pound and q quar-
ter, hurled at him while standing on
the steps Of railroad train, Just as |
the train is pulling out from the
station where number of people |
have gathered in the night time. and
who Immediately thereafter draws
his pistol and fires at. anu kills. one
OF two persons standing a little apart
from the crowd. who he supposed was
the person that threw the stone and
who he believes is in the act of hurl-
ing another at him, is not guilty OIL
murder. Killing under such circum-
stances is done in the heat Of passion
suddenly aroused by sufficient provo
cation and is without malice.
Atkinson ct al VS.. Chesapeake q
Ohio Railway Company. Logan coun-l