Imágenes de páginas

holding carrier liable for injury to passenger resulting from its negligence, unless passenger was guilty of contributory negligence.

Cited in footnotes to Herrman v. Great Northern R. Co. 57 L. R. A. 390, which holds railroad company liable for injury to passenger from unsafe condition of depot premises leased of union depot company or its receiver; Delaware, L. & W. R. Co. v. Trautwein, 7 L. R. A. 435, which holds carier required to keep passageway at station, though other passageway provided; Redigan v. Boston & M. R. Co. 14 L. R. A. 276, which denies recovery to licensee falling through open trap door in station platform.

Cited in notes (8 L. R. A. 673; 11 L. R. A. 720) on duty of carrier to use care for safety of passengers in general; (20 L. R. A. 520) on measure of care carrier must exercise to keep platforms and approaches safe; (16 L. R. A. 593) on duty of carrier to maintain safe approaches beyond premises. Assumption that carrier will perform duty.

Cited in Kenutcky & I. Bridge Co. v. McKinney, 9 Ind. App. 217, 36 N. E. 448, holding passenger entitled to assume approaches, platform, and means of entering cars are in reasonably safe condition; Citizens' Street R. Co. v. Merl, 26 Ind. App. 291, 59 N. E. 491, holding passenger boarding street railway car ontitled to rely upon opportunity being given to enter safely, or of being notified of apparent danger; Citizens' Street R. Co. v. Merl, 134 Ind. 611, 33 N. E. 1014, holding passenger boarding wrong car entitled to rely upon opportunity to make change in safety, or of being notified by employees of danger foreseen by them. Contributory negligence in getting on or off train.

Cited in Carr v. Eel River & E. R. Co. 98 Cal. 374, 21 L. R. A. 365, 33 Pac. 213; Louisville, E. & St. L. Consol. R. Co. v. Bean, 9 Ind. App. 243, 36 N. E. 443; Pittsburgh, C. C. & St. L. R. Co. v. Gray, 28 Ind. App. 592, 64 N. E. 39, holding passenger attempting to alight from slowly moving train not necessarily negligent; Kentucky & I. Bridge Co. v. McKinney, 9 Ind. App. 222, 36 N. E. 448, holding whether person alighting from moving train guilty of negligence is question for jury; Cincinnati, H. & I. R. Co. v. Revalee, 17 Ind. App. 665, 46 N. E. 352, holding woman passenger attempting to alight from slowly moving train, and thrown by sudden jolt without warning, not negligent as matter of law.

Cited in note (21 L. R. A. 358) on injuries in getting on and off trains. Witness; privileged communications.

Cited in Gurley v. Park, 135 Ind. 442, 35 N. E. 279, holding physician attending testatrix during last illness not competent to testify from what he “saw and heard” as to patient's soundness of mind; Post v. State, 14 Ind. App. 455, 42 N. E. 1120, holding physician incompetent to testify as to facts communicated to or observed by, him, in his professional capacity; Kern v. Kern, 154 Ind. 34, 55 N. E. 1004, holding communications between testator and attorney in reference to will, not privileged after death of testator, where both litigants claim under him; New York, C. & St. L. R. Co. v. Mushrush, 11 Ind. App. 197, 37 N. E. 954, holding physician not permitted to reveal facts coming to his knowledge while attending injured person, although employed and paid by person causing injury; Ætna L. Ins. Co. v. Deming, 123 Ind. 391, 24 N. E. 86, holding taking of deposition of physician to break force of deposition of same witness previously taken by opposite party not waiver of objection to witness as incompe

tent; Brackney v. Fogle, 156 Ind. 538, 60 N. E. 303, holding failure to call attending physician to testify to soundness of mind of testatrix cannot be commented on by counsel nor considered by jury; City of Warsaw v. Fisher, 24 Ind. App. 53, 55 N. E. 42 (dissenting opinion), majority holding defendant's counsel in action for personal injury may comment on omission of plaintiff to call physician attending him.

7 L. R. A. 693, TODD v. OVIATT, 58 Conn. 174, 20 Atl. 440. Rights of surviving husband or wife in other's real estate.

Cited in Ward v. Ives, 75 Conn. 601, 54 Atl. 730, denying existence of curtesy in lands of which wife has only an estate in remainder expectant upon life estate in another, which did not terminate during coverture.

Cited in note (11 L. R. A. 826) tenancy the curtesy in wife's estate.

Distinguished in Greene v. Huntington, 73 Conn. 113, 46 Atl. 883, holding statute giving widow dcwer in real estate of which husband died “possessed," includes equitable remainders in fee, although possession held in trust.

7 L. R. A. 701, OHIO SOUTHERN R. CO. v. MOREY, 47 Ohio St. 207, 24

N. E. 269.

Actions; jurisdiction of person.

Cited in Kinsey v. Burgess Steel & Iron Works, 4 Ohio N. P. 294, holding corporation organized within state cannot be sued in county where its agents are temporarily transacting business, but in which it has no permanent office or agency; Long v. Newhouse, 57 Ohio St. 370, 49 N. E. 79, holding want of jurisdiction

person of defendant cannot be raised in answer after repeated motions attacking complaint; American Mut. L. Ins. Co. v. Mason, 159 Ind. 20, 64 N. E. 525, holding filing of answer to the merits, waiver of objections to jurisdiction of the person. Liability for acts of independent contractor.

Cited in Fisher v. Tryon, 15 Ohio C. C. 557, holding liability of owner for negligence of independent contractor depends on whether injury reasonably anticipated, if proper care not used; Pittsburgh, C. & St. L. R. Co. v. Shields, 47 Ohio St. 393, 8 L. R. A. 466, 21 Am. St. Rep. 840, 24 N. E. 658, holding inability of master to shift responsibility for acts of servants rests on principle holding owner liable for negligence of independent contractor; Steinbock v. Covington & C. Bridge Co. 4 Ohio N. P. 230; Covington & C. Co. v. Patrick, 5 Ohio N. P. 375, and Covington & C. Bridge Co. v. Steinbrock, 61 Ohio St. 228, 76 Am. St. Rep. 375, 55 N. E. 618, holding legal duty of owner causing burned wall to be removed, to have work protected, cannot be delegated; Wertheimer v. Saunders, 95 Wis. 579, 37 L. R. A. 148, 70 N. W. 824, holding landlord, putting on new roof at request of tenant, bound to see due care used to prevent injury from elements; Reuben v. Swigart, 15 Ohio C. C. 577, holding owner not relieved from liability for contractor depositing building material in street, under permission granted owner on condition that same be guarded and lighted; Gable v. Toledo, 16 Ohio C. C. 524, holding city liable for injury from falling into unguarded excavation in street, made by its authority, although work done by independent contractor; Morris v. Woodburn, 57 Ohio St. 335, 48 N. E. 1097, holding owner constructing vault under sidewalk liable for injury arising from defective cover

ing during construction; Hawver v. Whalen, 49 Ohio St. 80, 14 L. R. A. 835, 29 N. E. 1049, holding person causing lot to be excavated next to sidewalk cannot shift duty to guard excavation by letting work to independent contractor; Bonaparte v. Wiseman, 89 Md. 21, 44 L. R. A. 484, 42 Atl. 918, holding owner liable for damages to adjacent premises from negligence of contractor making excavation for building; Cameron v. Oberlin, 19 Ind. App. 147, 48 N. E. 386, holding owner employing person to clear land liable for damage from his negligence in permitting fire to escape to adjacent premises; Thompson v. Lowell, L. & H. Street R. Co. 170 Mass. 582, 40 L. R. A. 347, 64 Am. St. Rep. 323, 49 N. E. 913, holding exhibition provided by independent contractor will not relieve employer from responsibility, if of nature likely to cause injury, unless guarded against; Jacobs v. Fuller & H. Co. 67 Ohio St. 70, 65 N. E. 617, holding master liable for injury to inexperienced employee put to work on dangerous machine without instructions, though employed by foreman; Strong v. Pickering Hardware Co. 9 Ohio C. C. 252, raising question whether owner liable for injury to person falling over board erected across sidewalk during repair of building, though work done by independent contractor; Davis v. Summerfield, 133 N. C. 329, 63 L. R. A. 496, 45 S. E. 654, holding that owner cannot escape liability for injury to neighbor's building through excavation, by letting work to independent contractor; Reilly v. Chicago & N. W. R. Co. 122 iowa, 528, 08 N. W. 464, holding railroad company not liable for injury to employee of independent contractor due to latter's negligence; Hoff v. Shockley, 122 Iowa, 728, 64 L. R. A. 542, 98 N. W. 573, holding owner not liable for negligence of independent contractor in failing to barricade sand in street.

Cited in note (14 L. R. A. 828) on exceptions to rule that employer not liable for act of independent contractor.

Distinguished in Leavitt v. Bangor & A. R. Co. 89 Me. 519, 36 L. R. A. 384, 36 Atl. 998, holding railroad employing person to clear timber from right of way, and furnishing cooking car, not liable for damage from fire set by cooking car; Independence v. Slack, 134 Mo. 76, 34 S. W. 1094, holding owner not liable for injury to person falling over stone left in street by independent contractor employed to lay sidewalk; Clark v. Northern P. R. Co. 59 L. R. A. 512, holding railroad permitting circus to exhibit on land adjoining switch yard, not chargeable with duty of exercising care to protect public from dangers incident to crossing yard. Injury to trespassers.

Distinguished in Clark v. Northern P. R. Co. 29 Wash. 147, 59 L. R. A. 508, 69 Pac. 636, holding railroad company not liable for injury to minor crossing tracks, as short cut to circus on company's grounds.

[ocr errors]

7 L. R. A. 705, SNODDY v. AMERICAN NAT. BANK, 88 Tenn. 573, 17 Am. St.

Rep. 913, 13 S. W. 127.
Validity of negotiable paper given for illegal consideration.

Cited in Irwin v. Marquett, 26 Ind. App. 393, 84 Am. St. Rep. 297, 59 N. E. 38, holding check given in payment of bet made at cards void under statute in hands of bona fide holder; Citizens' State Bank v. Nore (Neb.) 60 L. R. A. 738, 93 N. W. 160, holding note for medical services by unlicensed practitioner valid in hands of bona fide holder.


Cited in footnotes to Drinkall v. Movius State Bank, 57 L. R. A. 341, which holds title to cashier's check acquired by payee's indorsement to gambler in payment for chips to be used in gambling, defective; Ullman v. St. Louis Fair Asso. 56 L. R. A. 606, which denies right to abandon partly executed illegal bookmaking contract for specified period, and recover back pro rata amount of money paid.

Cited in note (16 L. R. A. 46) on rights of bona fide purchaser of note declared void by statute.

Distinguished in Bohon v. Brown, 101 Ky. 362, 38 L. R. A. 505, 72 Am. St. Rep. 420, 41 S. W. 273, holding under statute requiring note taken for patent right to have words “Peddler's note" written across face, note given for patent right, without such indorsement, not void in hands of innocent purchaser, where it does not appear sale was by peddler. Invalidity of gaming contracts.

Cited in footnotes to Appleton v. Maxwell, 55 L. R. A. 93, which denies right of action for money loaned to be used in gambling; Booth v. People, 50 L. R. A. 762, which sustains statute making unlawful, options for sale of commodities whici have been subject of gambling operations; Central Stock & Grain Exchange v. Bendinger, 56 L. R. A. 875, which holds broker liable to refund to principal money illegally taken from agent as margins on gambling transaction; First Nat. Bank v. Carroll, 8 L. R. A. 275, which holds guaranty that cattle will sell at specified price in consideration of receiving all above such price, gambling contract; Jemison v. Citizens Sav. Bank, 9 L. R. A. 708, which holds speculative dealing in cotton futures by savings bank, ultra vires; Olson v. Sawyer Goodman Co. 53 L. R. A. 648, which holds void, agreement to debit and credit on accounts due employees, their winnings at card games with each other; Pope v. Hanke, 28 L. R. A. 568, which holds comity dues not require execution of law against public policy.

Stock gambling contracts.

Cited in footnote to Baxter v. Deneen, 64 L. R. A. 949, which holds that equity will not aid party to stock gambling contract to recover margins deposited by broker.

7 L. R. A. 706, CARTWRIGHT v. DICKINSON, 88 Tenn. 476, 12 S. W. 1030. Stock subscription contract.

Approved in Greenbrier Industrial Exposition v. Rodes, 37 W. Va. 740, 17 S. E. 306, holding signing and acknowledging statutory agreement for organization of corporation, binding when company incorporated and organized; Bannister v. Wallace, 14 Tex. Civ. App. 455, 37 S. W. 250, holding obligor not released from convict bond because of agreement with person presenting same, for others' signatures not obtained.

Cited in footnote to Elyton Land Co. v. Birmingham Warehouse & Elevator Co. 12 L. R. A. 307, which holds subscribers liable to creditors where stock paid for by conveyance of land worth only amount assumed by corporation.

Cited in notes (33 L. R. A. 596) as to withdrawal of subscription for shares of corporation; (10 L. R. A. 707) as to notice to agent being notice to principal; (61 L. R. A. 627) on right of corporation to purchase its own shares of stock.

Distinguished in First Nat. Bank v. Peoria Watch Co. 191 Ill. 134, 60 N. E. 359, holding subscriber for capital stock surrendered without payment for in full, upon resale not liable; Hudson Real Estate Co. v. Tower, 161 Mass. 14, 42 Am. St. Rep. 379, 36 N. E. 680, holding that subscriber to capital stock may withdraw before corporation organized upon giving due notice. Effect of mistake of law.

Cited in footnote to Atherton v. Roche, 55 L. R. A. 591, which denies power to reform deed to daughter and husband and “their” heirs so as to include all heirs of her body. Increase of capital stock by by-law.

Cited in Union R. Co. v. Sneed, 99 Tenn. 6, 41 S. W. 364, holding increase of capital stock by mere resolution of board of directors, void; Ross-Meehan Brake Shoe Foundry Co. v. Southern Malleable Iron Co. 72 Fed. 961, holding increase of capital stock by mere resolution of stockholders, void; Peck r. Elliott, 38 L. R. A. 622, 24 C. C. A. 432, 47 U. S. App. 605, 79 Fed. 16, holding increase of capital stock by amendment of by-laws, valid where corporation authorized to fix same by by-laws. Issuance of certificate as affecting stockholder's status.

Cited in Sherwood v. Illinois Trust & Sav. Bank, 195 Ill. 118, 88 Am. St. Rep. 183, 62 N. E. 835, holding that issuance of certificate of stock not necessary to status as stockholder. Subscriptions for unauthorized stock.

Cited in note (38 L. R. A. 616) as to power to increase capital stock of corporations.

7 L. R. A. 711, SCHROEDER v. GALLAND, 134 Pa. 277, 19 Am. St. Rep. 691,

19 Atl. 632. Subcontractor's lien.

Explained in Nice v. Walker, 153 Pa. 124, 31 W. N. C. 523, 34 Am. St. Rep. 638, 25 Atl. 1065, holding lien may be filed whenever not expressly or by necessary implication prohibited in contract.

Cited in Herrell v. Donovan, 7 App. D. C. 340, and Wilkinson v. Brice, 148 Pa. 155, 30 W. N. C. 31, 23 Atl. 982, holding lien invalidated by contractor's stipulation to file no lien; Ballman v. Heron, 160 Pa. 385, 34 W. N. C. 139, 28 Atl. 914, holding stipulation to file no lien, in building contract between cotenants, invalidates liens in absence of fraud; Tebay v. Kirkpatrick, 146 Pa. 124, 29 W. N. C. 186, 23 Atl. 318, and Fidelity Mut. Life Asso. v. Jackson, 163 Pa. 209, 34 W. N. C. 465, 43 Am. St. Rep. 789, 28 Atl. 883, holding agreement to keep building free from liens equivalent to contract not to file or permit filing of same; Bolton v. Hey, 148 Pa. 157, 23 Atl. 973, Affirming 10 Pa. Co. Ct. 381, holding contract stipulation for payment upon release of liens, and delivery free of liens, implied agreement not to file same, binding on subcontractor; Bolton v. Hey, 168 Pa. 419, 31 Atl. 1097, holding judgment in first action conclusive in second action to enforce lien; Waters v. Wolf, 162 Pa. 156, 34 W. N. C. 410, 42 Am. St. Rep. 815, 29 Atl. 646; holding statute June 8, 1891, making contractor's agreement concerning liens immaterial in absence of subcontractor's assent unconstitutional; Dersheimer v. Maloney, 143 Pa. 536, 22 Atl. 813, hold. ing subcontractor precluded from lien by stipulation of contractor that owner not accountable in any manner for materials; Morris v. Ross, 184 Pa. 243, 38

« AnteriorContinuar »