The Columbus courier. [volume] (Columbus, Luna County, N.M.) 1911-1920, 1920-03-26

= A. WNNN"IItA NINNIINNI. |IEIO
county; No eep3.
The appellant was placed On trial
In ne dla|r|cl court 81 Olcro eoun-
~ under an indictment oharelnr
him with murder ia he nral de-
ereo, Il being alleged that he had
killed ono Martin v. Williams. The
petit jury returned a verdict of
guilty or murder IN the sscoNd de-
gree. A motion was lnloIposcd for
q new trial and overruled. and SON
lence pronounced From which
thi1 appeal Is prosecuted.
Judgment OF The court below re-
versed. new trial granted.
syllabus.
Where there IL no substantial
evidence Of lie corpus deficit IN q
homicide case, The verdict finding
defendant guilty vf second degree
murder viii sct aside on ap-
peal.
Opinion by Roberts. g.: Parker,
c. J. and Rayn0lds. j. ooncurrlns.
State OF New Mexico. appnllee.
W. Samuel /. Hunt and J. 8 Hunt.
appellants, Grant county; No. 23ti.
This Is an appeal from q eonvic =
lion Of murder in the second de-
gree.
syllabus
4. II IL within the discretion Of
the trial Judge 10 admit IN rchutlal,
or Al the Time for rcbuliol, facts
and circumstances which are not
strictly IN rchuilal and which
should be. or might have been, Of
fcrcd IN chief.
2 An additional instruction n
the Jury upon their roporting 70 the
court their inability 70 agree. call
ing the attention Of the Jury 70 the
expense 10 the county and The de-
PENDANTS OF the trial, the lcneih Of
time 4 had taken 10 try the case,
and which told them II was their
duty TO agree II an agreement was
possible without any juror violal-
ing conscientious conviction, was
not erroneous.
q II IL improper for the trial
Judge 10 have any communication
with tho members Of the Jury
about the case on trial which IL not
in open court and In the presence
Of the defendant.
Opinion by Roberta, j. reversing
and remanding the case for now
trial; Parker. c. J.. and Reynolds,
J.. cuncurring.
Eugene A. Bcccher, appellee, VI.
W. y. Tinnin, appellant, DonA Ana
county; No. 23SS.
This Is a suit filed IN the district
court 10 ~forcclose q real estate
mortgage securing two pr0misary
notes each for 1851. 80 and inter
est Breach Of considerations OF
the mortgage was alleged which
consisted Of q failure 10 pay the
note Al maturity. Tho complaint
contained the usual allegations hi
such a suit and asked for a den~
cheney Judgment over. Appellant
answered, admitting some allega-
iiona and denying others and filed
a counterclaim. IN which he sought
10 recover from the appellee for al
leged breaches Of covenants con-
tanned Ia hte deed from appellee.
Demurrer was nled 10 the answer
and demurrer was also llled 10 the
reply by appellant which was over
ruled by the court and appellant
electing 10 stand upon the same
Judgment was entered upon Tho
proof .adduced on behalf Of appel
lee, f~orcclosing the mortgage, from
which Judgment this appeal is
prosecuted
Judgment Of. tho court below a.
flrmed.
Syllabus.
4. Where the title 10 land at
tempted 10 be conveyed IL in the
public. there 10 such n hostile nas-
aession as amounts 10 an eviction
the instant the deed 10 made.
2. The covenant Of selsln Is per-
sonnl, and does not run with the
land. II broken al al. Il is broken
when made. and a cause OF action
thereupon Instantly arised In IA
vor OF the eovenanlee. which does
not pass 10 his grantee merely b.
virtue OF the deed Of conveyance.
,. The covenant In warranty
runs with the land. and inuras n
the benefit OF subsequent grantees.
80 long a. NO breach thereof has
occurred. The instant q breach oil
covenant has occurred q chntn IN
action arlaes IN favor Of the eeleletl
person, or The n claiming the
right and title 10 the land, and who
is In privity with the covenanior.
and this chose In action 10 not
transferred or assigned simply hr
virtue o. a deed OF ~conveyaneo
4 The covenant against incum-
hrance Is a covenant a. 10 lhlnea
existing al the tina u 4 made. I'LL
broken Al all. Il h broken II ne
moment Il - made, and tho chuso|