Imágenes de páginas

mus, 2.

[ocr errors]


[ocr errors]

In mandamus proceeding, see Manda- | PHYSICIANS AND SURGEONS.

Effect of wrong treatment by, on meas9. A corporation issuing stock is not a

ure of damages for personal injury, necessary party to a suit by stockholders in

see Damages, 5. another corporation which owns such stock, Liability of carrier for negligence of to compel the latter to place the title to

physician employed to treat injured the stock in its own name. Hyams v. Old

passenger, see Carriers, 1. Dominion Co. L.R.A.1915D, 1128, 93 Atl. Criminal liability for negligence, see 747, Me.


Sufficiency of indictment for PARTNERSHIP.

slaughter, see Indictment, etc., 1. Doing of business by, under assumed As to dentists, see Dentists. name, see Tradename, 2, 3.

Where a patient in a hospital is

treated by a physician who does not manage PASSENGER CARRIERS.

or control the hospital, he is not liable for See Carriers.

the negligence of hospital nurses or internes,

if he had no connection with any negligent PATIENT.

act. Broz v. Omaha Maternity & G. H. Asso. In hospital, see Hospitals.

L.R.A.1915D, 334, 148 N. W. 575, 96 Neb.

648. PAYMENT. Recovery of, see Assumpsit.

PLAINTIFF. Subrogation for, see Subrogation.

Parties plaintiff, see Parties, 1-8. Under an application to a banker for a loan to be paid to a specified agent, PLAYGROUND. another banker, to whom the application is Injury to child on municipal playforwarded, does not complete the loan so

ground, see Municipal Corporaas to be entitled to the note and mortgage

tions, 15. given to secure repayment by paying the money to the banker to whom the applica

PLEADING. tion was originally directed. Shade

Evidence admissible under, see EviHayes, L.R.A.19150, 271, 151 N. W. 42,

dence, 50. S. D.

In criminal prosecution, see Indictment,


In mandamus proceeding, see MandaEvidence of, see Evidence, 26. PENALTIES.

Relief under pleadings. For violation of hours of service act,

1. Recovery cannot be allowed in an acsee Evidence, 5.

tion to compel directors of a corporation to Sufficiency of proof in action to recover, account for salaries alleged to have been see Evidence, 48.

illegally paid for years prior to the time claimed in the complaint or set up in plain

tiff's evidence. Godley v. Crandall & Godley PERMIT. For building, see Constitutional Law, 2. Co. L.R.A.1915D, 632, 105 N. E. 818, 212 N.

Y. 121.


Review of discretion as to, see Appeal To passenger, see Carriers.

and Error, 9. Measure of damages for, see Damages, 2. Where it clearly appears that the 5.

defendant was not misled, surprised, or in Evidence of declarations as to, general- any way prejudiced from maintaining his ly, see Evidence, 29, 30.

defense upon the merits, an amendment of Resulting from fright, see Fright. the complaint to conform to the facts proved By explosion of gas, see Gas.

should be allowed. French v. State FarmTo married woman, husband's right of ers' Hail Ins. Co. L.R.A.1915D, 766, 151 N.

action for, see Husband and Wife, W.7, 29 N. D. 426.

Declaration or complaint.
To servant, see Master and Servant.

Disbarment of attorney for malicious Proximate cause of, see Proximate

attack on court in petition, see Cause.

Evidence, 43.

3. One cannot recover for aggravation PERSONAL PROPERTY.

of a condition existing at the time of a perMortgage on, see Chattel Mortgage. Sale of, see Sale.

sonal injury due to another's negligence unless such condition and its aggravation are

pleaded. Salmi v. Columbia & N. R. R. Co. PETITION.

L.R.A.1915D, 834, 146 Pac. 819, Or. Of plaintiff, see Pleading, 3, 4.

4. To render directors of a corporation

personally liable for failure to file a cerPETROLEUM.

tificate of payment of the capital stock, unIn mines generally, see Mines.

der a statute compelling them to do so

mus, 3-6.

[ocr errors]


within a certain time after payment of the PRINCIPAL AND AGENT. last instalment of the stock fixed and lim- As to brokers, see Brokers. ited” by statute or vote of the corporation, Right to inspect books of corporation the complaint must show that the capital

through agent, see Corporations, was fixed and limited, and that the last

7, 7a. instalnient had been paid. J. L. Mott Iron Estoppel of insurance company by Works v. Arnold, L.R.A.1915D, 1028, 87 Atl.

agent's mistake, negligence, 17, 35 R. I. 456.

fraud, see Insurance, 20. Demurrer.

Right to discharge employee, see Mas. Demurrer to return in mandamus pro

ter and Servant, 4, 5. ceeding, see Mandamus, 3.

Notice of limitation on authority of 5. A petition alleging in substance that

agent of municipality, see Municithe proprietor of a business house whose

pal Corporations, 1. place of business abutted on a much traveled Authority to receive payment, see Paystreet in a city placed on the sidewalk in

ment. front of his place of business, without confining in a receptacle, or in any other way, PRINCIPAL AND SURETY. on a day when the wind was blowing sharp- As to bonds generally, see Bonds. ly, a large quantity of trash and loose sheets of paper, which were naturally liable to be

A surety on the bond of a town treas. blown about the streets by even a light make good money lost through a deposit

urer for a second term who is compelled to breeze, and naturally and inevitably tended in an insolvent bank during the first term to excite and frighten not only nervous horses, but even quiet and steady ones, and may compel contribution from the surety on further alleging that the plaintiff was in: American Surety Co. L.R.A.1915D, 481, 106

the bond covering such term. Yawger v. jured while driving two reasonably well N. E. 64, 212 N. Y. 292. (Annotated) broken, steady, and roadworthy horses along the street, through their becoming frightened by papers from the pile being blown PRIORITY. against their legs, sufliciently alleges neg

Of chattel mortgage, see Chattel Mortligence so as to withstand a general demurBowen v. Smith-Hall Grocery Co.

Of liens for repairs, see Liens. L.R.A.1915D, 617, 82 S. E. 23, 141 Ga. 721.


For obstruction of highway, see HighLiability for false imprisonment, see

ways, 1. False Imprisonment, 1.

For violation of ordinance, see Munic.

ipal Corporations, 9, 12. POLICE POWER.

To enforce water rates, see Parties, 3. See Constitutional Law, 17, 18; Mu

To enforce public right generally, see nicipal Corporations.

Parties, 3-7.

gage, 1.



Of water, see Waters, 1.


Evidence of, see Evidence, 27, 28.


PROBABLE CAUSE. On Pullman car, injury to, see Car- Instruction as to, see Appeal and Erriers, 6.

ror, 23.

Want of, for prosecution, see Malicious POSTOFFICE.

Prosecution, 1-3.
Ordinance giving mail carrier right of Question for jury as to, see Trial, 1, 2.

way in street, see Evidence, 36;
Municipal Corporations, 9, 12; | PROBATE.
Street Railways, 1; Trial, 12.

Appealability of probate decrees, see

Appeal and Error, 1, 2.
Of disposal in will, see Wills, 4.


See Writ and Process.
Dividends on, see Corporations, 25. PROOFS OF LOSS.

By insured, see Trial, 7.
See Appeal and Error, 20-26.


Guaranty of right of, see Constitutional PRESENCE.

Law, 7-16.
Of accused, necessity of, see Criminal!
Law, 2.


Indictment for conspiracy of woman PRESUMPTIONS.

transported in violation of white In general, see Evidence, 4-20.

slave act, see Criminal Law, 1.

[ocr errors]


5. Irregularities or defects in proceedOne who negligently places large | ings for a public improvement, and the asquantities of loose paper upon a street, sessment of benefits therefor, which are not where it will naturally be blown against brought to the attention of the court in a horses in the street, with knowledge that proceeding to review such proceedings, are the wind is blowing. or in the ordinary waived and cannot be brought forward in a course of nature is likely to blow while the proceeding to review a reassessment made paper remains there, cannot claim that such in accordance with the judgment entered on à wind is an independent intervening cause, such review. Reiff Portland, L.R.A. so as to prevent his negligence from being 1915D, 772, 141 Pac. 167, 142 Pac. 827, the proximate cause of an injury to a trav- 71 Or. 421. eler on the street from his horses becom- 6. The cost of extending a fill for a ing frightened; especially where there is street improvement over onto adjoining nothing in the case to show that there was property cannot be assessed against the any unforeseen or sudden wind of such a property benefited by the improvement so character as to come within the legal mean- far as it is in excess of the cost of a proper ing of the expression “an act of God.” retaining wall. Reiff v. Portland, L.R.A. Bowen v. Smith-Hall Grocery Co. L.R.A. 1915D, 772, 141 Pac. 167, 142 Pac. 827, 71 1915D, 617, 82 S. E. 23, 141 Ga. 721. Or. 421.



PUBLIC MONEYS. Cost of constructing and maintaining Assumpsit for, see Assumpsit, 2. bridge, see Bridges.

Loss of, by bank failure, see Banks. Matters peculiar to drains and sew

Who may maintain action to prevent ers, see Drains and Sewers.

waste of, see Parties, 4, 7. Certiorari to review reassessment of

cost of improvement, see Certiorari. Presumption that assessments

PUBLIC PROPERTY. made in proportion to benefits, see

Exemption of, from taxation, see Taxes, Evidence, 19.

2. Writ of review to review facts upon

which assessment is based, see Re: PUBLIC RIGHT.

Who may maintain action to protect, 1. An assessment for a street improve

see Parties, 3-7. ment is not invalidated by the fact that the municipality, in making a fill in the high- PUBLIC SCHOOLS. way, extended the slope onto abutting prop- See Schools. erty without obtaining a right to do so, and thereby became a trespasser, although the expense of the encroachment is included in PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION. the assessment. Reiff v. Portland, L.R.A. Who may question validity of statute 1915D, 772, 141 Pac. 167, 142 Pac. 827, 71

conferring powers upon, see Action Or. 421.


or Suit, 2. 2. That a section of street which is to Authority as to depots, see Carriers, be improved as a whole contains a wooden

14-22. viaduct which will require a fill does not Presumption in support of order of, see make the portions of the improvement on

Evidence, 4. either side of it two improvements, requir- Regulation of water rates by, see Waing separate proceedings, under a charter

ters, 5. providing that the improvement of each street or part thereof shall be made under irrigation canal is one over which the Rail

1. A question as to the ownership of an a separate proceeding. Reiff v. Portland, L.R.A.1915D, 772, 141 Pac. 167, 142 Pac. Cook Irrigation & W. P. Co. v. Burtless,

way Commission has no jurisdiction. Mc827, 71 Or. 421. 3. The objection that an assessment for L.R.A.1915D, 1205, 152 N. W. 334, P. U. R.

1915C, 587, Neb a street improvement is void because a portion of the improvement extended upon requiring construction of a union railroad

2. An order of a Railroad Commission private property without acquiring the station under authority of a statute requirright, and that it is not made on the theory ing railroads to maintain such stations required by statute, may be raised by review of the assessment without the necessity of when the necessities of the case demand it, an appeal. Reiff v. Portland, L.R.A.1915D, commensurate with the business and reve. 772, 141 Pac. 167, 142 Pac. 827, 71 Or. 421.

nues of the company, will be accepted by the 4. Where the statute provides for filing court, in the absence of evidence to the conobjections to a municipal improvement, tax trary, as a finding that the situation juspayers waive the objection that two separate G. S. R. Co. L.R.A.1915D, 98, 64 So. 13, 185

tifies it. Railroad Commission v. Alabama portions of a street were included in one

Ala. 354. proceeding by failing to raise the question at the time the statute provides. Reiff v. Portland, L.R.A.1915D, 772, 141 Pac. 167, PUBLIC WATER SUPPLY. 142 Pac. 827, 71 Or. 421.

See Waters, 4-8.

[ocr errors]


to give the required signal is not liable for Limitation of liability for injury to injury to one at work near the crossing,

employee on, see Carriers, 6. through the frightening of his horse, alOperator on, as employee of railroad though at the time of injury he had taken

hauling car, see Master and Serv- the horse onto the highway on his way ant, 1.

home, to reach which required traveling

away from the railroad track. Hutto v. PUNISHMENT.

Southern R. Co. L.R.A.1915D, 962, 84 S. For contempt, see Contempt, 7.

E. 719,
S. C.





RAPE. Offer by, see Contracts, 1.

Evidence in prosecution for, see Evi

dence, 39. RACE SEGREGATION. See Constitutional Law, 14.


Water rates, see Waters, 4-8.
See Public Service Commissions.


By corporation, see Corporations, 2-4. RAILROADS.

Of municipal indebtedness, see MuniciStatute as to remodeling or construc

pal Corporations, 13.
tion of caboose, see Action or Suit,
2; Commerce; Evidence, 3; Stat- REAL ESTATE BROKER.
utes, 4.

See Brokers.
Injury to passenger by application of

emergency brake to save person in REAL PROPERTY.

peril on crossing, see Carriers, 2-4. Oral contract as to, see Contracts, 4, 5. Forbidding person to act as conductor Covenants and conditions as to, see without having previously served

Covenants and Conditions. as freight conductor or brakeman, Rights, duties and liabilities on transsee Constitutional Law, 11.

fer of, see Vendor and Purchaser. Railr track


Estates or interests created by wills, breach of covenant against encum:

see Wills, 4, 5.
brances, see Covenants and Condi-
tions, 3.

REASONABLENESS. Garnishment of cars of foreign rail- Of municipal ordinance generally, see road company, see Garnishment.

Municipal Corporations, 7.
Use and occupation of highway for, see
Highways, 2.

Rights, duties and liabilities as to em-

Right of receiver to appeal, see Appeal ployee, see Master and Servant.

and Error, 4. Limiting hours of labor of employees,

Mandamus to, see Mandamus, 1.
see Master and Servant, 2, 3.
Liability on theory of attractive nui-
sance for injury to child, see Negli-

Liability for defective search of, see Ab-

stracts. 1. An exercise of the right of eminent On appeal, see Appeal and Error, 5. domain is not necessary to enable a street Recording notice of redemption, see railway company, having municipal au

Constitutional Law, 20. thority to lay its tracks along a public Recording of assumed

under highway, to cross the tracks of a railroad

which business is transacted, see company which are laid across the street

Contracts, 8. at grade. Mississippi C. R. Co. v. Hatties- Judicial notice by court of its own recburg Traction Co. L.R.A.1915D, 843, 67 So.

ords, see Evidence, 1. 897, Miss.

Of certificate giving names of members (Annotated)

of partnership doing business un2. A railroad company is not liable for

der assumed name, see Tradename, injury to a person near its right of way by

3. a loose spike used to fasten the rail to the tie, which was hurled from the track by a

REDEMPTION. rapidly moving train, even though the com- From foreclosure sale, see Mortgage, 4. pany knew of the condition of the spike, since such injury could not have been anticipated. Trinity & B. V. R. Co. v. Black

REFORMATION OF INSTRUMENTS. shear, L.R.A.1915D, 278, 172 S. W. 544,

Of insurance policy, see Insurance, 4. Tex

3. A statute requiring railroad com- REGISTRATION. panies to give signals when trains approach Of automobile, see Automobiles, 2. highway crossings creates no duty in favor of persons working near the crossing, and REHEARING. therefore a railroad company which failed On appeal, see Appeal and Error, 29.

gence, 3.




REVENUE. Evidence of, see Evidence, 26.

Power of legislature as to raising of,

see Legislature. RELEASE. By porter on Pullman car of carrier's REVERSIBLE ERROR.

liability for injury, see Carriers, 6. See Appeal and Error, 20–26. Of mortgage, see Mortgage, 2.


The facts upon which an assessment Of evidence, see Evidence, 32-43. for a public improvement is based and the

result of the assessment cannot be reviewed RELIGIOUS FREEDOM.

by writ of review where the statute provides In general, see Constitutional Law, 19. for an appeal, where the facts may be

passed upon by a jury. Reiff v. Portland, RELIGIOUS SOCIETIES.

L.R.A.1915D, 772, 141 Pac. 167, 142 Pac.
Forbidding location of public garage 827, 71 Or. 421.

near church, see Buildings, 4; Mu-
nicipal Corporations, 6.


Of will, see Wills, 1, 2.
In schools, see Schools, 3.


Ordinance giving mail carrier right of RENT.

way in street, see Evidence, 36. Husband's right to recover rent of wife's property, see Husband and

Wife, 6.

Indictment for, see Indictment, etc., 4. REPAIRS.

SALE. Lien for, see Liens.

Acceptance of offer, see Contracts, 1. REPEAL.

Governmental regulation of, see ConOf statute, see Statutes, 9.

stitutional Law, 12, 13. Priority of lien for repairs over claim

of conditional vendor of property, REPETITION. Of instruction, see Trial, 10.

see Liens, 3-5. Of land generally, see Vendor and Pur

chaser. REPLEVIN. To recover exempt property levied on, ( Passing of title; delivery. see Levy and Seizure, 2.

1. The failure of a seller of goods to

promptly reclaim the goods, which were REPRESENTATIONS.

sold under a contract providing for cash By insured, see Insurance.

on delivery, upon the failure of the pur

chaser to pay when the goods were deRESCISSION.

livered, and his unsuccessful endeavor for Of land contract, see Vendor and Pur six months to collect the account, constichaser.

tute in law a waiver of the conditions of

the sale so that the title passes to the RESERVOIR.

buyer, where it is not shown that the selDrowning of child in, see Negligence, 4. ler’s delay in reclaiming the goods was

caused by some trick or artifice on the part RES GESTÆ.

of the buyer. Lehmann v. People's FurniSee Evidence.

ture Co. L.R.A.1915D, 355, 142 Pac. 986, 42 Okla. 761.

(Annotated) RESIDENCE.

Warranty. For purpose of divorce suit, see Divorce Damages for breach of warranty, see and Separation.

Damages, 2.

Evidence on question of breach of war. RESIGNATION.

ranty, see Evidence, 40. Acceptance of resignation of employee, 2. The liability of a manufacturer of see Master and Servant, 4, 5. fertilizer upon his warranty to the retail

er cannot be enlarged by warranties inRES JUDICATA.

serted by the latter in his contracts with See Judgment, 1, 2.

consumers. Hampton Guano Co. v. Hill RESPONDEAT SUPERIOR.

Live-Stock Co. L.R.A.1915D, 875, 84 S. E.

774, 168 N. C. 442. See Master and Servant, 9, 10.

3. An action for the purchase price of RETAINING JURISDICTION.

fertilizer sold under a warranty as to inSee Executors and Administrators, 5. gredients cannot be defeated because it was

not suitable to the purpose for which it was RETURN.

sold. Hampton Guano Co. v. Hill LiveTo rule to show cause in contempt pro- Stock Co. L.R.A.1915D, 875, 84 S. E. 774, ceeding, see Contempt, 6.

168 N. C. 442.

« AnteriorContinuar »