Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

Refusal to issue stock; damages; release of | corded there, will not prevent him (or his heirs stockholders; substitution of stockholders; after his death) from bringing such suit in anchange in amount of stock. 707 other State where the will was made. McQuerry v. Gilliland (Ky.)

COSTS.

Taxable costs of all parties in a suit for the construction of a will may be ordered out of the funds of the estate before distribution. Powers v. Judevine (Vt.) 517

NOTES AND BRIEFS.

454

[blocks in formation]

6. An Act providing for the appointment of commissioners of the supreme court "to

Costs; county attorney's fees in mandamus assist... in the performance of its duties, proceedings not taxable.

COUNTIES.

106

See also INTEREST, 1. 1. A contract by which a board of county commissioners attempts to employ a legal adviser for a period of three years, to commence three months in the future and after the time for the election of a person to fill the vacancy caused by the expiration of the term of office of one member of the board, the term of employment extending over a period during which

all the members of the board as constituted at the time of the contract will retire therefrom

unless re-elected,-is against public policy and void. Jay County v. Taylor (Ind.)

64

160

2. The county of Cascade, under the Mon: tana Act of Sept. 12, 1887, providing that it "shall be liable for and shall pay the sum of $30,000" to the county of Choteau, from which it was created, giving it the option to cause warrants to be issued, which on being indorsed, Not paid for want of funds," shall bear interest, or to issue coupon bonds and sell them, -cannot discharge the debt by delivery of the bonds, but, if it issues the bonds, must convert them into cash and pay the debt. Territory, Choteau County, v. Cascade County (Mont.) 105 3. When the law itself imposes a duty on county commissioners as such, and they are not appointed thereto by the county, the county will not be responsible for their breach of duty, or for their nonfeasance or misfeasance in relation to such duty.

NOTES AND BRIEFS.

Id.

Counties; debts of; how created; how enforced. 106

COURTS. See also SUNDAY, 2; TIME, 1.

1. An action on a contract is within the jurisdiction of the courts of the State in which is the place of performance, although the parties are residents of other States. Cofrode V. Gartner (Mich.) 511 2. Consent of the parties is sufficient to give jurisdiction over them to a court which has jurisdiction of the subject matter. Id.

3. A court has no discretion to refuse to hear a case between nonresidents of which it has jurisdiction, merely because the suit is brought there only for convenience of parties and attorneys, and will entail expense upon the county. Id.

4. The inability of the beneficiary under a will to bring suit for conveyance of land to him as directed by the will, in the State where the land is situated, because the will is not re

under such rules and regulations as said court may adopt," is not in violation of the California Constitution. People, Morgan, v. Hayne (Cal.) 348

7. Commissioners "to assist " a court do judicial power, by taking such transcripts not usurp judicial functions, or exercise any and briefs as a court shall assign to them, and reporting the result of their examination thereof, with opinions and suggestions merely for the consideration of the court as to the proper disposition of the cases.

Id.

[blocks in formation]
[blocks in formation]

465

air therefrom to their property, by the con. struction of an elevated railroad in such street, the amount to be awarded therefor the jury are entirely consequential; and in determining may consider the benefits as well as the injuries resulting from such construction.

Id.

7. In an action by a lessee of property abutting upon a street through which an ele vated railroad is constructed, to recover damages for the permanent impairment of his easement in the street for light, air, and access, the general appreciation of the value of property consequent upon such improvement cannot be considered, as it belongs to the property-owner, but special and peculiar advantages which tend to increase the rental value of the property are elements which the jury must consider in deId. termining the amount of their award.

1. Damages for an alleged negligent construction of a sewer, in consequence of which plaintiff's premises are injured by discharge 8. Damages for loss of services of plaintherefrom, must be limited to the actual dam- tiff's wife by reason of personal injuries are age sustained up to the time of bringing suit, not confined to the value of her services within and cannot include prospective damages, on the the household, but may include the value of ground that the defects are permanent, al- her services as manager of her husband's busithough human labor will be necessary to rem-ness, where she was thus engaged at the time edy the defects. Nashville v. Comer (Tenn.) of the injury, without any contract or expectation of pay for her services. Citizens Street R. Co. v. Twiname (Ind.) 352 9. In an action by a father to recover for the loss of services of his minor child by reason of injuries inflicted upon him by a third person, which result in his death, the recovery must be limited to the damages which accrued during the period between the injury and the death, death occurred. Davis v. St. Louis, 1. M. & S. and cannot embrace those accruing after the R. Co. (Ark.)

2. A railroad cannot be made responsible for exemplary damages on account of injuries done by one of its servants, even though the act was wanton and malicious, unless the act was expressly or impliedly authorized or ratified by the company. Ricketts v. Chesapeake & O. R. Co. (W. Va.)

354

3. In proceedings to assess damages for the taking of property for railroad purposes, whatever injuriously affects the owner's adjoining property as the direct and necessary result of the location of the road may be considered by the jury in making their assessment: Schuyl kill River E. S. R. Co. v. Kersey (Pa.)

409

4. Where the location of a railroad across property leased as a coal yard makes necessary new appliances for the continuation of the coal business, and increases the cost of raising and storing the coal, as well as the breakage and waste in handling it, the additional expense and loss, together with the cost of the new appliances, may properly be received in evidence in a proceeding by the lessee to recover damages for such location, not as specific items of claim, but as affecting the market value of the leasehold.

283

[blocks in formation]

Id.

[blocks in formation]

5. The benefits which will accrue to property by reason of the construction of a railroad must necessarily be considered in determining the amount of the consequential damages to be allowed to its owner on account of such construction, and their consideration for such purpose is not prohibited by the statute which forbids commissioners, in determining the compensation to be made to owners of property acquired for the construction of railroads, to make any allowance or deduction on account of any real or supposed benefits which the party ir interest may derive from the construc tion of the proposed road. Newman v. Metropolitan Elev. R. Co. (N.Y.) 289

[blocks in formation]

1. An administrator has no right, under the Massachusetts Employers' Liability Act (Mass. Laws 1887, chap. 270), to recover damages on account of the death of his intestate from injuries caused by the employers' negligence, in addition to his right as legal representative to recover the damages which accrued to the intestate in bis lifetime. Ramsdell v. New York 154 & N. E. R. Co. (Mass.)

6. The damages to abutting-property own ers by reason of the destruction of their easements for ingress and egress to and from a pub- 2. The Arkansas Act of 1883 does not lic street, and the free circulation of light and I take away the right which survives to the per

DECLARATIONS-EASEMENTS.

sonal representative by Mansf. (Ark.) Dig. | DEPOSITIONS.
5223, to recover upon the cause of action for
injuries which accrued by the common law to
an injured party in his lifetime; nor does it de-
prive a father of his right to maintain his
common-law action for loss of services of his
minor child. Therefore in case of the death
of a minor the three actions may be prosecuted

at the same time and recoveries had in each
and all of them. Davis v. St. Louis, I. M. & 8.
R. Co. (Ark.)
3. The Arkansas Act of 1883 (Mansf. Dig.
283
$$ 5225, 5226) embodying the provisions of
Lord Campbell's Act in regard to suits to re-
cover damages for death resulting from the
wrongful act, neglect, or default of another,
applies to all cases in which a recovery may
be had under that Act, regardless of the agency
by which the injury was inflicted, and super-
sedes the Act of 1875 relating to suits for in-
juries by railway trains. Hence such suits must
be brought by the personal representative for
the benefit of the widow and next of kin. 1d.
NOTES AND BRIEFS.

154

Death; right of action for damages. Who may recover damages for death from negligence. 283

DECLARATIONS. See EVIDENCE, IV.

DEED.

1. An estate granted by deed cannot be expanded by recitals or statements of the grantor made in a later deed, to the injury of an intervening title. Mills (Mass.) Whitney v. Wheeler Cotton 2. A reservation, in a conveyance of right 613 of way, of any use to the grantor, will not be presumed in the absence of any provision therefor. Herrman v. Roberts (N. Y.) 3. The grantee of the heirs of one who has made an unacknowledged deed is not a 226 "purchaser," within 1 N. Y. Rev. Stat. 738, § 137, declaring that an unacknowledged and unattested deed "shall not take effect as against a purchaser or incumbrancer until so acknowledged. Strough v. Wilder (N. Y.)

NOTES AND BRIEFS.

555

Deed; attestation and delivery of; presumption as to delivery; effect when lands in possession of third parties.

Quitclaim deed as notice.

556 524

DEFINITIONS. See also CORPORATIONS, 12; PEDDLERS, 1; TAXES, 4; WILLS, 1.

897

accused may be used on trial when, on acDepositions taken in the presence of the count of death or other good cause, the presence of the witness cannot be had. This is not in violation of the 6th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States. Territory Evans (Id.)

V.

NOTES AND BRIEFS.

646

Depositions; taken in foreign State; effect of.

Admissibility of, upon trial.
DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.

265 646

providing that a county attorney shall receive certain fees to be taxed as costs for collections 1. Under Mont. Comp. Stat. p. 870, § 847, made for the county, such fees may be taxed in a proceeding by writ of mandate to compel the payment of money into the treasury as well as in an action brought for recovery of the money. Territory, Choteau County, v. Cascade County (Mont.)

105

der Mont. Comp. Stat. p. 870, 847, to more 2. A county attorney not being entitled, unthan $1,200 in fees, the amount of fees already received by him must be deducted from $1,200 and the balance only taxed in his favor, where the percentage allowed would make the total DIVORCE. See HUSBAND AND WIFE, 12more than that sum. Id. 14, NOTES AND BRIEFS. DOMICIL. See ATTACHMENT, 1. DOWER.

See also MORTGAGE, 6.

during the period in which the common-law
A conveyance by a man of his real estate
pended barred all claim of his wife thereon, al-
though she did not join in the conveyance.
right of married women to dower was sus-
Odom v. Riddick (N. Č.)
118

DRAFTS. See BILLS AND NOTES.
DRAINS 'AND SEWERS. See EASE-
MENTS, 4; MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS, 8.
DURESS.

Papers executed to shield the maker's son
from a threatened prosecution for a felony of
which he is guilty are not executed under du-
ress so as to require their cancellation. Shat-
tuck v. Watson (Ark.)
551

NOTES AND BRIEFS.
Duress; what constitutes.

551

1. The relation of husband and wife, or that of parent and child, is not necessary in EASEMENTS. See also DEED, 2; Noorder to constitute a "family." Moyer v. Drummond (S. C.)

[blocks in formation]

way to a highway from the residence of the grantee, who has expendled money in preparing the roadway, cannot ceposi stone or other obstruction thereon, or cut it up by drawing heavy loads over it, or in any wɛy materially obstruct or injure the road bed. Herrman v. Roberts (N. Y.) 226

3. The use of stairways in a building erected by several owners of 1 nd as a single structure, upon a single plan and under a single contract, no matter whether the land was then partitioned or not, cannot be denied by the owners of that part which includes the stairways to the owner of another part the upper floors of which can be reached in no other way. Pierce v. Cleland (Pa.) 752 4. The expiration of a license given to a town to maintain a drain over lands of the licensor will not relieve the town from liability for injuries caused by the subsequent obstruction of the drain, when such drain is the necessary outlet of the sewerage system of the town, and there is nothing to show abandonment thereof on the part of the town, but its use continues the same after as before the license expires, and the town afterwards obtains the further right to continue it. Bates v. Westborough (Mass.) 156

NOTES AND Briefs. Easement; what passes by grant of right of 226

way.

[blocks in formation]

7. The reclamation of flats situated upon Boston Harbor and substantially useless in their original condition, for the avowed purpose of improving the harbor and of providing better and more complete accommodations for the railroad and commercial interests of the city of Boston, by filling such flats with solid earth, is a matter of such public benefit that the flats may be taken by the Commonwealth for such purpose, under the power of eminent domain, notwithstanding a possible pecuniary benefit to the Commonwealth may be contemplated by the sale of the flats when filled. Hence Mass. Acts 1884, chap. 290, which provides for such taking, is not unconstitutional as authorizing the taking of land for a use not public. Id.

8. The specific mention of and including in the same petition riparian rights in respect to other lands belonging to other persons does not affect the construction of the petition and proceedings in respect to the land in question. EMBEZZLEMENT. See PRINCIPAL AND Hanford v. St. Paul & D. R. Co. (Minn.) 722

ELECTION. See ESTOPPEL, 8.

AGENT, 2.

EMINENT DOMAIN. See also DAM
AGES, 5-7; HIGHWAYS, 1; RELEASE; WA-
TERS AND WATERCOURSES, 3.

9. A clause of a charter authorizing land to be taken, which makes the corporation "accountable to the owners thereof for all damages," does not include consequential injuries. Brooks v. Cedar Brook & S. C. R. Imp. Co. (Me.)

460

Id.

1. The taking of money by a private corporation created to administer a public charity 10. Incidental injuries to land by the washis not a taking of property for a public use ing away of the soil of the banks and bottom which may be authorized under the power of of a stream, caused by a reasonble increase of eminent domain. Cary Library v. Bliss (Mass.) | the flow of water at certain times, produced 765 by a dam authorized by the Legislature to 2. The taking of property which is held by facilitate the driving of logs, is not a taking one person for a public use by another person, of the property of a riparian owner for which to be held in the same manner for precisely the compensation is necessary. same public use, is not a matter of such public 11. The building by a railroad company, of necessity that it can be authorized by the Legis- a side track in a street along and upon which lature under the power of eminent domain. it has a right of way and has a single track in Id. operation, constitutes no additional burden up3. A mere change in the use of land from on property abutting upon the street, for which agricultural to city purposes is not taking pri- damages may be recovered by its owner, where vate property for public use. Callen v. Junc- the statutes enabled the company to locate its tion City (Kan.) 736 tracks upon the street and to appropriate a right of way 6 rods wide, and it gave notice that its appropriation would be made "in as full and ample and perfect a manner as may be required" for railroad purposes, and it paid the assessed damages, which were duly accepted. White v. Chicago, St. L. & P. R. Co. (Ind.) 257

4. A statute requiring any railroad company to build, at its own expense, a crossing for any individual whose residence is separated by the railroad from a public highway, is, if such crossing is to be considered as for a public use, unconstitutional in taking the property of the company for public use without compensation. People v. Detroit, G. H. M. R. Co. (Mich.)

&

717

12. The construction of a telegraph and telephone line on a railroad company's right of way imposes an additional servitude or burden 5. The owners of land taken under the on the land, for which the owners are entitled provisions of Mass. Acts 1884, chap. 290, au- to compensation, unless it is constructed by thorizing the taking of certain lands for the use the railroad company in good faith for its own of the Commonwealth, are not, by filing a pe- I use and benefit in the operation of the road and

EQUITY

to facilitate its business, or is reasonably neces
sary for that purpose. American Teleph. &
Teleg. Co. v. Smith (Md.)
13. The use of electricity by a street railway
200
company as a motive power will not render its
use of the street an imposition of an additional
servitude thereon, which will require the mak-
ing of additional compensation therefor to the
owner of the fee, where it does not appear that
the occupation of the street is any more exclu-
sive than though the road was operated by
horse-power. Taggart v. Newport Street R. Co.
(R. I.)
205

NOTES AND BRIEFS.

Eminent domain; taking for private, combined with public, use. 152

765

Vested rights subordinate to.
Exercise of right a political, not a judicial,
question.

Compensation to be made only for

Telegraph line along railroad right of way.
151
such
200

taking as transfers title.

Assessment of damages; rule for.

EQUITY.

the latter.

461

409

ESTOPPEL.

899

hand of knowing all the facts, accepts his share 2. A covenantee who, with the means at from his obligation, will be precluded from afof money paid by the covenantor for a release ter wards proceeding to enforce the covenant. Wood v. Bullard (Mass.) 304

deceased covenantee to carry out an agreement by such decedent to release, and to procure the 3. Proceedings by an administrator of a other covenantees to release, the covenantor from his obligation, will not estop him from setting up an independent right belonging to him as a covenantee to enforce the covenant, if exercising any right to enforce the covenant he has not ratified or profited by the agreement, although they may preclude him from which he may claim through or on behalf of the decedent.

Id.

4. Where the inhabitants of a town voted the Indians and peaceably enjoy certain tracts and agreed that a person might purchase from whether the town laid any claim thereto or not, of land, on his acquainting them of an intent to purchase them, and requiring to know and in the following year, when a patent obtained by him was publicly read, voted and agreed to acquiesce in the limits and bounds of the town is estopped from claiming, many bis patent and the privileges therein contained, years afterward, that it had title to the lands purchased by him when he obtained his patent. Brookhaven v. Smith (N. Y.)

755

of material facts, or a design to mislead, is not 5. A false representation or concealment mislead, and actually has misled, another actnecessary to constitute an equitable estoppel by an act which was voluntary and calculated to ing in good faith.

Id.

1. A suit by a vendor for specific perform ance of a fair contract for the sale of land can not be defeated on the ground that there is a remedy at law. Hodges v. Kowing (Conn.) 87 2. A remedy at law, to defeat a suit in equity, must be as complete and beneficial as 3. Where an illegal appropriation has been Id. made by a town council and warrants drawn thereon, some of which have been paid, equity has jurisdiction of a suit to cancel the unpaid warrants, to compel repayment of the money paid, and to annul the appropriation; and the to influence his conduct, and creating a reasonrecalling and cancellation of the unpaid war-able belief on his part, under which he acts, rants after suit is brought will not oust the ju- that he is thereby acquiring a valid title to the risdiction. In such case the court may grant same, the party who has thus influenced him affirmative, as well as injunctive, relief. Rus-is estopped frem setting up his own title existsell v. Tate (Ark.) 180 ing at the time of the purchase, against that of the purchaser.

NOTES AND BRIEFS.

Equity; remedy at law defeats jurisdic 67

tion.

534

Jurisdiction to sell infant's lands. ESCHEAT. See also CORPORATIONS, 22, 26. The penalty of escheat is removed, although the Act imposing it is not repealed in terms, when, before any inquisition is taken, a statute has declared that the land should be held "indefeasibly as to any right of escheat" in the Commonwealth. eral, v. New York, L. E. & W. R. Co. (Pa.) 634 Com. Attorney-Gen

ESTATE. See REAL PROPERTY, NOTES

AND BRIEFS.

the acts or representations of another, designed
6. If one is induced to purchase land by

[blocks in formation]

der a will requiring him to convey to others
certain land of which he holds the title cannot
8. One who has elected to take a devise un-
refuse to make such conveyance, and claim
that the land belongs to him. McQuerry v.
Gilliland (Ky.)

454

has received all the proceeds of real estate in 9. The widow of a deceased partner, who excess of the amount necessary to pay firm ESTOPPEL. See also BONDS, 4; CHECKS, Walling v. Burgess (Ind.) debts, is estopped from claiming any interest in the real estate as against the purchasers.

2.

1. One who has taken the benefit of a building regulation cannot repudiate the conditions on which it is given. Fowler v. Saks (D. C.)

481

NOTES AND BRIEFS
Estoppel; requisites of.
Equitable; fraud as an element; silent ac-
751, 757
649 quiescence.
755

7 L. R. A.

« AnteriorContinuar »