Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

1282

MINORITY STOCKHOLDERS—MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS.

one or more of the sands penetrated in drill- | 3. A mortgagor who has allowed taxes ing an oil well, and is afterward run from on the mortgaged land to become delinquent the casing head into a gas line from wells cannot defend a foreclosure action brought on an adjoining lease operated by the same by the mortgagee, who has paid the taxes lessee, and the gas from all utilized in op- and declared the entire debt due under the erating the wells on both properties, accord-terms of the mortgage, on the ground that ing to a custom prevailing among oil oper- the taxes thus paid were invalid. Farmers' ators, does not render the lessee in such Security Bank v. Martin, L.R.A.1915D, 432, lease liable to the lessor for annual gas 150 N. W. 572, N. D. (Annotated) rentals provided for in such lease. Prich- Redemption. ard v. Freeland Oil Co. L.R.A.1915D, 1186, 84 S. E. 945, W. Va.

MINORITY STOCKHOLDERS.

Rights of, see Corporations, 14-23.

MISTAKE.

Impairment of obligations by statute as to recording notice of redemption, see Constitutional Law, 20. 4. A certificate of redemption issued by the sheriff to the owner of mortgaged premises which had been foreclosed is not valid as against a purchaser for value of the

Parol evidence as to, see Evidence, 23. sheriff's certificate issued to the mortgagees In name, see Name.

MONOPOLY AND COMBINATIONS.

In collection of garbage, see Constitutional Law, 3, 8; Municipal Corporations, 10.

Contracts between two persons in restraint of trade, see Contracts, 7.

MOOT QUESTION.

See Courts, 2.

MORTALITY TABLES.

See Life Tables.

MORTGAGE.

As to chattel mortgage, see Chattel
Mortgage.

Effect of, on insurance, see Insurance,
10.

Priority of mortgage lien to lien of one paying taxes on the property, see Subrogation.

Taxes.

1. A mortgagee who is authorized by the mortgage to pay taxes which have been allowed by the mortgagor to become delinquent may pay a tax after its delinquency and without actual notice of its invalidity, although the assessment is fatally defective, since, the land being subject to taxation, the payment made by the mortgagee discharged it from liability for taxation for that year, while otherwise it would have been subject to reassessment and retaxation, and therefore the security of the mortgage was preserved. Farmers' Security Bank v. Martin, L.R.A.1915D, 432, 150 N. W. 572, - N. D. Satisfaction; release.

who had purchased at their foreclosure sale, where the certificate of redemption was wrongfully issued, in that certain taxes and liens which were necessary to the redemption were not paid by the owners. Heitsch v. Minneapolis Threshing Mach. Co. L.R.A.1915D, 349, 150 N. W. 457, 29 N. D.

94.

MOTIONS AND ORDERS.

To quash return in contempt proceeding, see Contempt, 6.

MOTIVE.

Of stockholder desiring to inspect books, see Corporations, 24.

MOTOR VEHICLES.
See Automobiles.

MULTIPLE STRUCTURES.

Effect of covenant to prevent erection of, see Covenants and Conditions, 2.

MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS.
License by, see License.

Duty as to parks, see Parks and
Squares.

Joinder of parties in action against, see
Parties, 8.

Exemption of municipal waterworks

from taxation, see Taxes, 2.

Powers and liabilities generally.

1. One who deals with a municipality does so with notice of the limitation on its or its agent's powers. Re Afton, L.R.A. 1915D, 978, 144 Pac. 184, 43 Okla. 720.

2. A municipal corporation incurs no 2. The marriage to the mortgagee of obligation, legal, moral, or equitable, with one who has executed a mortgage on her respect to the costs and attorneys' fees in real estate to secure repayment of a loan a suit instituted by the state to forfeit the from him does not extinguish the debts un- charter of a private corporation and to der constitutional and statutory provisions withdraw a monopolistic franchise which it making the property of a married woman had granted, the holder of which it her separate estate, which she may transfer, found violating the terms of the grant and and giving her the power to carry on busi- using the franchise for the oppression of ness and sue and be sued. McKie v. McKie, those whom it was intended to benefit, even L.R.A.1915D, 1126, 172 S. W. 891, Ark. though, as a result of the suit, the munic(Annotated)ipal corporation obtained without expense a privilege (of establishing a water, sewerMatters concluded by foreclosure de- age, and drainage system) for which other

Enforcement.

cree, see Judgment, 2.

-

wise, in expropriating the franchise in

question, it would have had to pay heavily. | People ex rel. Busching v. Ericsson, L.R.A.
Forman v. Sewerage and Water Board 1915D, 607, 105 N. E. 315, 263 Ill. 368.
L.R.A.1915D, 927, 66 So. 351, 135 La. 1031.
Legislative control over.

3. The legislature may compel a municipal corporation to pay a debt which is equitable in character, though not binding in law, but it has no power to compel such a corporation to pay a claim which it is under no obligation to pay, moral or equitable; and the less so where the issue of obligation vel non has been finally decided between the parties, by a court of last resort, and where the fund from which the payment is claimed has been placed, by the Constitution, under a particular control, and dedicated to particular uses, which do not include the payment of the claim in question. Forman v. Sewerage and Water Board, L.R.A.1915D, 927, 66 So. 351, 135 La. 1031. (Annotated)

Delegation of power.

4. A provision in a municipal ordinance requiring consent of neighboring property owners to the erection of nonfireproof buildings within fire limits is invalid as a delegation of the legislative power of the municipality to such property owners. Hays v. Poplar Bluff, L.R.A.1915Ď, 595, 173 S. W. 676, Ordinances.

Mo.

[ocr errors]

Regulations as to building, see Buildings.

Sufficiency of proof of violation of ordinance, see Evidence, 48. Injunction against enforcement of ordinance, see Injunction, 1, 4. Right to jury in proceedings to enjoin violation of ordinance, see Jury, 2. Negligence in violating ordinance enacted as a sanitary measure, see Negligence, 1. As to denying equal protection of the laws and abridging privileges and immunities, see Constitutional Law, 2, 3. Denial of due process of law or property rights by, see Constitutional Law, 8, 14. Evidence of violation of ordinance to show negligence, see Evidence, 36. 5. A provision in an ordinance establishing fire limits within which buildings composed of combustible materials cannot be erected, which permits the mayor and council to permit such buildings within the prohibited limits, cannot be eliminated, so as to permit the ordinance to be enforced as an absolute prohibition of such buildings. Hays v. Poplar Bluff, L.R.A.1915D, 595, 173 S. W. 676, Mo. -.

6. One seeking to locate a public garage near a church cannot attack the ordinance forbidding it because it also forbids such location near a public school without forbidding it near a private one. People ex rel. Busching v. Ericsson, L.R.A.1915D, 607, 105 N. E. 315, 263 Ill. 368.

7. A police ordinance passed by a municipal corporation under general authority from the legislature, which does not prescribe its details, must be reasonable.

8. A city ordinance which, in effect, prohibits one who owns and operates a machine shop from using the streets in bringing and taking traction engines and heavy vehicles to and from his shop, and thereby arbitrarily deprives him of an opportunity to carry on his business, is unreasonable and void. Brown v. Nichols, L.R.A.1915D, 327, 145 Pac. 561, 93 Kan. 737.

9. A municipality which has not reserved, in granting a street railway franchise, the right to create liability to individuals for injuries arising from its acts, cannot, by enacting an ordinance giving mail carriers a right of way in the street superior to street cars, create a right of action in favor of a mail carrier for injuries due to a breach of the ordinance by the railway company. Bain v. Fort Smith Light & Traction Co. L.R.A.1915D, 1021, 172 S. W. 843, Ark. (Annotated)

10. An ordinance limiting the collection of garbage in the city to one licensed collector is not void for unreasonableness. Rochester v. Gutberlett, L.R.A.1915D, 209, 105 N. E. 548, 211 N. Y. 309. (Annotated)

11. No constitutional property rights are interfered with, even with respect to existing plants, by forbidding the issuance of any garage permit allowing the storage of volatile inflammable oil, for a building within a prescribed distance of any school, place of public amusement, or assembly, tenement house, or hotel. Re McIntosh, L.R.A.1915D, 603, 105 N. E. 414, 211 N. Y. 265. (Annotated)

12. A municipal ordinance giving wagons carrying United States mail the right of way in the street superior to street cars is to be enforced merely by fine for its violation, and not by private action by a mail carrier injured by its nonobservance. Bain v. Fort Smith Light & Traction Co. L.R.A 1915D, 1021, 172 S. W. 843, Ark. Borrowing money; indebtedness.

-

[ocr errors]

13. Indebtedness of a town, which under the Constitution can be contracted only by the assent of three fifths of the voters thereof, which was actually contracted without such assent, cannot thereafter be ratified by the voters so as to make it a valid obligation of the town. Re Afton, L.R.A. 1915D, 978, 144 Pac. 184, 43 Okla. 720.

14. Section 1, chap. 116, p. 244, Sess. Laws of Okla. 1910, authorizing a court to validate warrants issued for debts in excess of the annual revenue and income of a city or incorporated town, is in conflict with § 26, art. 10, of the Constitution, providing that the indebtedness of a city or incorporated town shall not in any manner or for any purpose exceed in any year the income and revenue provided for such year, without consent of three fifths of the voters thereof. Re Afton, L.R.A.1915D, 978, 144 Pac. 184, 43 Okla. 720. Liability for damages.

Liability for defects or obstructions in street, see Highways, 3-6.

15. A municipal corporation is not liable for injury to a child by negligent use by other children of a swing on a park playground which it maintains for the public welfare, and for the maintenance of order in which it assigns policemen, although lack of care on the part of municipal employees may have contributed to the injury. Nashville v. Burns, L.R.A. 1915D, 1108, 174 S. W. 1111, 131 Tenn. 281.

16. A notice given by a parent of a claim for injuries sustained by his minor child, which contains the essential information required by the statute, is sufficient, although it fails to state specifically that the parent claims damages on his own account and also as the statutory representative of his child, and fails to make an apportionment between the two of the amount claimed. Ackeret v. Minneapolis, L.R.A. 1915D, 1111, 151 N. W. 976, 129 Minn. 190,

MURDER.

See Homicide.

MUTILATION.

Revocation of will by, see Wills, 2.

MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY. See Insurance.

NAME.

Effect of mistake in name on records on liability of abstracter, see Abstracts.

As to tradename, see Tradename.

NATURAL GAS.

In mines, see Mines.

NECESSARIES.

As to highway, see Highways.

As to negligent homicide, see Homicide.

Of hospital, see Hospitals.

Of master or servant, see Master and
Servant.

Of municipal corporation, see Munic-
ipal Corporations, 15, 16.

Proximate cause of injury by, see Proximate Cause.

Of railroad, see Railroads.

In operation of street railway, see
Street Railways.

As question for jury, see Trial, 4, 5.
Instructions as to, see Trial, 12, 13.
Of warehouseman, see Warehousemen.
Of irrigation company, see Waters, 2,
3.

1. The fact that an ordinance requiring the proprietor of a business house to keep a covered garbage can outside his place of business, in which to place all refuse, garbage, and trash, to be called for by the proper city officers, was enacted as a sanitary measure, does not prevent the placing of trash and loose sheets of paper in front of a business place from being held negligence as a matter of fact, although it may prevent it from being held negligence per se. Bowen v. Smith-Hall Grocery Co. L.R.A. 1915D, 617, 82 S. E. 23, 141 Ga. 721. Injuries to children; dangerous attrac

tions.

2. The act of coupling two wagons together, and thus driving them on the street without a guard or outlook on or about the rear wagon in order to warn children who might attempt to climb thereon, does not of itself constitute negligence on the part of the owner of the wagon, so as

Wife's liability for, see Husband and to render him liable in damages for the

NEGATIVE.

Wife, 2.

Negation of defenses or exceptions indictment, see Indictment, etc.

[blocks in formation]
[blocks in formation]

death of a child who climbed on the connecting pole, from which he afterward fell, and was run over by the rear wagon, the doctrine of the "Turntable Cases" not being applicable to such facts. Zigman v. Beebe & Runyan Furniture Co. L.R.A.1915D, 536, 151 N. W. 166, 97 Neb. 689.

3. A railroad company which maintains without barriers an inclined retaining wall with a wide, smooth top, along the side of a viaduct lawfully constructed over a city street, is not, although the top is some distance from the surface of the street, liable

for injury to a child who climbs upon the wall and falls off onto the street, upon the theory of attractive nuisance. Coon v. Kentucky & I. Terminal R. Co. L.R.A.1915D, 160, 173 S. W. 325, Ky.

-.

(Annotated)

4. A mill owner is negligent in permitting a fence inclosing a reservoir with perpendicular sides, and filled with 7 to 8 feet of water, to the top of which a sloping embankment leads on the outside, to become dilapidated, when the reservoir adjoins the playground of the children of the mill operatives, so as to be liable for the death of a five-year-old boy who, while at play, crawls through the fence for a drink and is drowned. Starling v. Selma Cotton Mills,

L.R.A.1915D, 850, 84 S. E. 388, 168 N. C. set aside the verdict on the ground of such

[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small]

1. Withdrawing from the jury the question whether or not defendant in an action to recover damages for injuries inflicted by a moving automobile was exceeding the speed limit is ground for new trial at the instance of plaintiff, whose award of compensatory damages was small, even though he was found to be guilty of contributory negligence, since the withdrawal of such issue would deprive plaintiff of the benefit of evidence in support of it in determining the question of his negligence. Ludke v. Burck, L.R.A.1915D, 968, 152 N. W. 190, 160 Wis. 440.

2. A writen answer to a written question sent by a jury which has retired, to the judge, who is waiting in the lobby of the court to receive the verdict, without requiring the attendance in court of the parties and their counsel, is, although the answer is accompanied by a statement that the question and answer are immaterial, ground for new trial, where the nature of the communication is never disclosed to the contending party, notwithstanding a statute requiring errors relating to pleading and procedure to be disregarded which do not injuriously affect the substantial rights of the parties. Lewis v. Lewis, L.R.A.1915D, 719, 107 N. E. 970, 220 Mass. 364. (Annotated)

3. Where a motion for new trial is made by one convicted of murder, with knowledge of the fact that the verdict was rendered in his absence, and such motion does not contain that fact as ground for new trial, though it is recited therein, it is too late, after the motion for new trial has been denied and the judgment affirmed by the supreme court, to make a motion to

absence. Frank v. State, L.R.A.1915D, 817, 83 S. E. 645, 142 Ga. 741.

4. Upon the question whether or not a juror was so biased against accused as to justify setting aside a verdict against him, his affidavit to the effect that he used his influence to reduce the punishment fixed by the jury is admissible. Brannon v. Com. L.R.A.1915D, 569, 172 S. W. 703, 162 Ky.

350.

NOMINAL DAMAGES. See Damages, 1.

NONCLAIMS.

Statute of, see Executors and Administrators, 6.

NONRESIDENTS.

Judgment against, see Attachment.

NOTICE.

To attorney before disbarment, see Attorneys, 3.

Imputing to officer knowledge of corporation, see Bills and Notes, 4. Of redemption, see Constitutional Law, 20. Allegation as to, in indictment, see Indictment, etc., 1.

Of loss or death, see Insurance, 21. Of limitation upon powers of municipality, see Municipal Corporations,

1.

[merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small]

OIL.

As to oil in mines generally, see Mines. structed by a mutual irrigation ditch com

OPINION.

As evidence, see Evidence, 24, 25.

OPTION.

2. One leasing land under a ditch conpany, from a holder of shares in the company, by an instrument providing that he will accept as full water right for said land a definite fraction of the water right held by the lessor, is in such privity with the

Option contract generally, see Con- ditch company as to enable him to maintain tracts, 1, 2.

ORDINANCES.

an action against it for negligent failure to maintain the ditch, in consequence of which he is deprived of the water to which

In general, see Municipal Corporations, he is entitled, to his injury. Berg v. Ya5-12. kima Valley Canal Co. L.R.A.1915D, 292, 145 Pac. 619, Wash.

OWNERSHIP.

Of property insured, see Insurance, 810.

Jurisdiction of Railway Commission over question of, see Public Service Commissions, 1.

PARENT AND CHILD.
Action by father for loss of services of
minor child, see Husband and Wife,

4.

Sufficiency of notice by parent to city of claim for injury to child, see Municipal Corporations, 16.

PARKS AND SQUARES.
Maintenance and care of, by municipal-
ity in governmental capacity, see
Highways, 4.

A city that contracts and maintains walks and footpaths in its parks, which are used as thoroughfares in passing from one part of the city to another, is liable for injuries resulting from dangerous conditions in such walks caused by the negligence of its employees. Ackeret v. Minneapolis, L.R.A.1915D, 1111, 151 N. W. 976, 129 Minn.

190.

PAROL EVIDENCE.

See Evidence, 23.

PARTIAL INVALIDITY.

Of ordinance, see Municipal Corporations, 5.

PARTIES.

1.

[blocks in formation]

4. State election officials are not within the operation of a statute permitting a taxpayer's action to prevent waste of funds of a county, town, city, or incorporated village to be maintained against any officer thereof, or any agent, commissioner, or other person acting in its behalf, or to prevent an illegal official act on the part of officers, agents, commissioners, or other persons acting for any county, town, village, or municipal corporation. Schieffelin v. Komfort, L.R.A.1915D, 485, 106 N. E. 675, 212 N. Y.

520.

5. A court has authority to determine the constitutionality of acts of the legisspecial, peculiar, personal rights are aflature only in proceedings by a person whose fected thereby, and cannot, therefore, at the instance of a taxpayer, pass upon the constitutionality of the act of the legislature in providing for a revision of the Constitu

tion. Schieffelin v. Komfort, L.R.A.1915D, 485, 106 N. E. 675, 212 N. Y. 520.

6. An individual taxpayer cannot maintain a suit in equity to determine the result of an election at which the question was submitted to the voters whether or not a constitutional convention should be held. Schieffelin v. Komfort, L.R.A.1915D, 485, 106 N. E. 675, 212 N. Y. 520.

7. A citizen and taxpayer of a state has To criminal offense, see Criminal Law, no standing as such to contest the expendi ture of funds under an alleged unconstitutional statute. Sutton v. Buie, L.R.A.1915D, 178, 66 So. 956, - La. -.

Plaintiffs.

Action by stockholder of corporation,
see Corporations, 15–23.

Husband, see Husband and Wife, 4-6.
Who may question validity of ordinance,

see Municipal Corporations, 6. Private action for violation of ordinance, see Municipal Corporations, 9, 12.

Who may question validity of statute, see Statutes, 2.

1. One who has sold and received payment for goods deposited in a warehouse and identified so that the title has passed cannot hold the warehouseman liable for negligently permitting the property to be injured. Hecht v. Boston Wharf Co. L.R.A. 1915D, 725, 107 N. E. 990, 220 Mass. 397.

[blocks in formation]
« AnteriorContinuar »