structed under the evidence on aggravated as-name, it will be presumed that such advance- sault. Jackson v. State (Tex. Cr. App.) 239. ments constitute a gift.-O'Hair v. O'Hair (Ark.) 945.
A charge on simple assault held required un- der the evidence on a trial for assault with intent to murder.-Reyes v. State (Tex. Cr. App.) 245.
Evidence held not sufficient to require submis- sion to the jury of the issues of manslaughter and self-defense.-Franklin v. State (Tex. Cr. App.) 357.
In a prosecution for murder, certain evidence held not to justify a charge on provoking the difficulty.-Crow v. State (Tex. Cr. App.) 814. In a prosecution for murder, facts held in- sufficient to justify the qualification of a charge on self-defense.-Crow v. State (Tex. Cr. App.)
§ 11. Appeal and error.
In a prosecution for murder, admission in evidence of the bloody clothing of deceased held not cause for reversal.-Long v. State (Tex. Cr. App.) 203.
Railroad hospital association held a distinct corporation from the railroad, and the latter was not liable for the negligence of the for- mer's physicians in treating a railroad em- ployé. Illinois Cent. R. Co. v. Buchanan (Ky.) 312.
Action by wife for wrongful death of husband, see "Death," § 1.
Appointment of receiver in suit to cancel deed of trust of wife's separate "Receivers."
property, see Competency as witnesses, see "Witnesses," § 1. Conveyance of wife's separate estate, see "Deeds," § 1.
Excessive damages for injuries to wife, "Damages," § 4. Fraudulent conveyances between, see "Fraudu- lent Conveyances," § 2.
Hearsay on issue of ownership of property as between husband and wife, see "Evidence," § 6.
Husband as trustee of wife, see "Trusts," § 2. Interest on judgment in favor of trustee in bankruptcy for community funds invested in improvements on wife's separate property, see "Interest," § 1.
Measure of damages for injury to married woman, see "Damages," § 3.
Rights of survivor, see "Descent and Distri- bution," § 1; "Homestead," § 3. Rights of trustee in bankruptcy as to commu- nity property, see "Bankruptcy," § 2.
§ 1. Mutual rights, duties, and liabili-
The children of a husband and wife, to whom land had been conveyed, take on the wife's death a half interest in the land, and share with the husband's children by a second wife on his death in the other half.-Campbell v. Asher (Ky.) 1067. § 2.
Conveyances, contracts, and other transactions between husband and wife. Where a husband advances money to pay for land. title to which is taken in his wife's
A wife, who merely signs notes of her hus- band as his surety, does not charge her separate estate.-Bowron v. Curd (Ky.) 1106.
A conveyance of real estate by a husband to his wife makes the land conveyed her sep- arate estate, irrespective of whether the deed specifically so declares.-Jones v. Humphreys (Tex. Civ. App.) 403.
The separate property of a wife cannot be sold to reimburse the community estate for improvements made out of community funds. -Collins v. Bryan (Tex. Civ. App.) 432.
A wife who had joined in deed of trust on her separate property held, as to certain por- tions of the debt, not released, under Sayles' Ann. Civ. St. 1897, art. 2970, by the husband's extension.-De Barrera v. Frost (Tex. Civ. App.) 476.
The insolvency of a husband does not affect the rule that a contract or extension of his debt, not participated in by the wife, dischar- ges her property which stands as surety for the debt.-De Barrera v. Frost (Tex. Civ. App.) 476.
Certain provisions in a deed of trust given by a husband and wife on her separate property to secure his debt held not to have authorized
him to make extensions so as to deprive her of any rights she might have by reason of an extension not participated in by her.-De Bar- rera v. Frost (Tex. Civ. App.) 476.
A husband has no authority to extend any indebtedness secured by a mortgage on the wife's separate property.-De Barrera v. Frost (Tex. Civ. App.) 476.
Burden held on the wife to show, as against creditors of the husband, that funds used in purchases and investments were not furnished by the husband.-Sharp v. Fitzhugh (Ark.) 929.
A husband may recover damages for breach of a contract made with him for the erection of buildings on his wife's land.-Simons v. Wittmann (Mo. App.) 791.
§ 5. Community property.
No presumption arises that improvements erected by a husband out of community funds on land which is the separate property of his wife are a gift, in the absence of evidence to show such intention.-Collins v. Bryan (Tex. Civ. App.) 432.
In a suit by a wife to cancel a deed of trust given by her and her husband on her separate property to secure his debt, the authorizing of a receiver to rent the property and collect the rents held not erroneous.-De Barrera v. Frost (Tex. Civ. App.) 476.
Of defendant on prosecution for burglary, see "Burglary," § 1.
* Point annotated. See syllabus.
See "Arson"; "Burglary," § 1; "False Pre- tenses"; "Forgery"; "Homicide," § 6; "Larceny," § 2; "Rape," § 2; "Robbery." Establishing or keeping lottery, see "Lotteries," § 1.
1. Filing and formal requisites of in- formation or complaint.
An information for arson held sufficient as to the venue, under Rev. St. 1899, § 2527.- State v. Hunt (Mo. Sup.) 719.
Information held sufficient, without repeating venue in verification.-State v. Bailey (Mo. Sup.) 733.
The omission of the seal of the court to the jurat of the clerk does not invalidate the veri- fication of an information.-State v. Forsha (Mo. Sup.) 746.
§ 2. Requisites and sufficiency of accu- sation.
An indictment for murder held sufficient.- Newman v. Commonwealth (Ky.) 1089.
§ 3. Issues, proof, and variance. Under Code Cr. Proc. 1895, art. 420, it must be shown that an offense was committed prior to the presentment of the indictment.-Moore v. State (Tex. Cr. App.) 228.
Liability of building and loan association for negligence of building contractor, see "Build. See "Courts," § 3. ing and Loan Associations."
Act Cong. July 1, 1902, c. 1362, §§ 31-33, 32 Stat. 646-648. providing for the establishment of a Choctaw and Chickasaw citizenship court of the Indian Territory, etc., held constitutional. -Wallace v. Adams (Ind. T.) 308.
INDICTMENT AND INFORMATION. Presentation of objections for purpose of re- view, see "Criminal Law," § 22.
Criminal accusation, see "Indictment and In- formation."
INHERITANCE.
See "Descent and Distribution."
See "Taxation," § 3. *Point annotated. See syllabus.
Review of judgment on complaint for violation Insurance partnership, see "Partnership," § 4. of, see "Contempt," § 1.
INSANE PERSONS.
Competency of witnesses on issue of sanity, see "Witnesses," § 1. Harmless error in trial of issue of sanity of accused, see "Criminal Law," § 27. Indigent insane persons, see "Paupers," § 1. Insanity of accused after conviction, see "Crim- inal Law," § 20.
Opinion evidence as to sanity of accused, see "Criminal Law," § 11.
Prejudice against plea of insanity as affect- ing competency of jurors, see "Jury," § 3. Trial of issue of insanity of accused, see "Crim- inal Law," § 15.
§ 1. Property and conveyances.
The action of the guardian of an insane per- son in bringing a partition suit as to the ward's interest in real estate binds the ward to every- thing which the partition suit could validly ac- complish.-Cowling v. Nelson (Ark.) 913.
Mistake in policy of insurance as ground for reformation, see "Reformation of Instru- ments," § 1.
Parol or extrinsic evidence of policy, see "Evi- dence," § 8.
Questions for jury in general in action on policy, see "Trial," § 4.
§ 1. Insurance agents and brokers.
In action on policy of insurance, evidence held to show that insurance agent was made the agent of the insured for the purpose of pro- curing and canceling policies so that defend- ant's policy was in force.-Phoenix Ins. Co. v. State (Ark.) 917.
Insurance solicitor held agent of the general agent, and not of the policy holder, in accept- ing a note for a premium.-Remmel v. Wither- ington (Ark.) 967.
8 2. Estoppel, waiver,
agreements affecting right to avoid or for- feit policy.
The stipulation in a policy of fire insurance for cancellation on five days' notice to the as- sured is for the benefit of, and may be waived by, the assured.-Phoenix Ins. Co. v. State (Ark.) 917.
*A soliciting agent of a life insurance com- pany held not authorized to accept notes in lieu of cash payments of premium.-Mutual Life Ins. Co. v. Abbey (Ark.) 950.
*A general agent of an insurance company held authorized to bind the company by ac- cepting notes in lieu of cash payments of pre- miums.-Mutual Life Ins. Co. v. Abbey (Ark.)
Under Kirby's Dig. § 4375, the value of a house wholly destroyed by fire is not open to evidence in an action on the insurance policy covering the same.-American Cent. Ins. Co. v. Noe (Ark.) 572.
A provision in an accident policy that it in- sured only against total inability to perform any of the duties of insured, who was a mer- chant, cannot be construed literally, and has no practical control over other provisions of
"Assignments for Benefit of Creditors"; the policy.-James v. United States Casualty "Bankruptcy."
INSTITUTIONS.
State institutions, see "States," § 1.
In civil actions, see "Trial," §§ 5-11. In criminal prosecutions, see "Criminal Law," § 17; "Homicide," § 10.
Co. (Mo. App.) 125.
§ 5. Notice and proof of loss.
A provision of an accident policy held not to work a forfeiture for failure to comply with a provision as to notice.-James v. United States Casualty Co. (Mo. App.) 125.
§ 6. Adjustment of loss.
An award made pursuant to the terms of a fire policy should not be vacated unless it clear- ly appears to have been made without author- ity, or to be the result of fraud or mistake or of the misfeasance of malfeasance of the ap-
* Point annotated. See syllabus.
praisers.-Niagara Fire Ins. Co. v. Boon (Ark.) | Purchase price of land, see "Vendor and Pur-
7. Actions on policies.
Under the express provisions of Kirby's Dig. 8 4381, if plaintiff in an action on an insurance policy suffers nonsuit, he may commence a new action within one year after such nonsuit.- American Cent. Ins. Co. v. Noe (Ark.) 572.
In an action on a life policy, evidence held to warrant a finding that insurer's general agent accepted notes in lieu of cash payment of a premium on the policy.-Mutual Life Ins. Co. v. Abbey (Ark.) 950.
An instruction in an action on a life policy held to correctly submit to the jury the issue whether the insurer's general agent accepted notes in lieu of cash payment of the premium on the policy.-Mutual Life Ins. Co. v. Abbey (Ark.) 950.
In an action on an accident policy providing for double payments if insured was injured while a passenger on a street car, evidence held to justify submission to the jury of the ques- tion whether plaintiff was a passenger at the time he was injured.-James v. United States Casualty Co. (Mo. App.) 125.
§ 8. Mutual benefit insurance.
A fraternal beneficial association doing busi- ness in Texas will be presumed, in the absence
Pecuniary interest in particular subjects. Effect as to credibility of witness, see "Wit- nesses," § 3.
1. Rights and liabilities in general. Husband's trustee in bankruptcy held not entitled to interest on a judgment for the amount of community property of bankrupt invested in improvements erected on separate property of bankrupt's wife.-Collins v. Bryan (Tex. Civ. App.) 432.
8 2. Time and computation.
Under Rev. St. 1899, § 3705, contingent at- torney's fee held to become due on and bear interest from the final determination of the case.-Morrow v. Pike County (Mo. Sup.) 99.
INTERLOCUTORY JUDGMENT.
Appealability, see "Appeal and Error," § 1. INTERNATIONAL LAW.
See "Aliens"; "Treaties."
INTERROGATORIES.
of proof to the contrary, to have been incor- To jury, see "Trial," § 12. porated for the purpose described in Acts 1899, To witnesses, see "Depositions." p. 195, c. 115, §§ 1, 2, 3, and could not divert its benefit fund to pay certificates of another society with which it had no power to consol- idate.-Whaley v. Bankers' Union of the World (Tex. Civ. App.) 259.
A mutual benefit society, alleged to have ab- sorbed another society by which plaintiff's wife was insured for plaintiff's benefit, held not lia-
ble on such certificate on the ground of equita- In attachment proceedings, see "Attachment,” ble estoppel.-Whaley v. Bankers' Union of
the World (Tex. Civ. App.) 259.
The holder of a certificate against a mutual benefit association held entitled to enforce his
rights against its assets which had been turn- See "Descent and Distribution." ed over to another association under an in- valid consolidation agreement only through a receiver. Whaley v. Bankers' Union of the World (Tex. Civ. App.) 259.
Under the by-laws of a mutual benefit so- ciety, written acceptance of a benefit certificate held not necessary to its validity.-Sovereign Camp Woodmen of the World v. Brown (Tex. Civ. App.) 372.
The holder of a mutual benefit certificate who exchanged it for a new certificate held not en- titled to recover the premiums paid on the first certificate. Supreme Council A. L. H. v. Lyon (Tex. Civ. App.) 435.
Criminal, see "Burglary," § 1; "Robbery." Of parties to contract, see "Contracts," § 1.
Authority of agent to collect interest as evi- dence of authority to collect principal, see "Principal and Agent," § 2.
On particular classes of liabilities. See "Bills and Notes."
County warrant, see "Counties," § 3. Damages for wrongful death, see "Death," § 1. Funds of ward, see "Guardian and Ward," § 1. Money collected by attorney, see "Attorney and Client," § 2.
INTOXICATING LIQUORS.
Absence of witness as cause for continuance in action on liquor dealer's bond, see "Con- tinuance." Adoption of local option as ground for termina- tion of lease of premises for saloon purposes, see "Landlord and Tenant," §§ 1, 3. Argument and conduct of counsel in prosecu- tion for offense against liquor laws, see "Criminal Law," § 16.
Best and secondary evidence of vote cast at election on license question, see "Evidence," § 3.
Hearsay in prosecution for violation of liquor law, see "Criminal Law," § 9.
Judicial notice of local option laws, see "Crimi- nal Law," § 6.
Presumptions in action on liquor dealer's bond, see "Evidence," § 1.
Reception of evidence in prosecution for offense against liquor laws, see "Criminal Law," § 15. Duty of excise commissioner to make and cer- tify record in relation to granting dramshop license, see "Certiorari," § 2.
Under Kirby's Dig. § 5119, license issued by county judge raises a presumption that a ma- jority of votes cast in the county were in favor of license.-State v. Songer (Ark.) 903.
Finding of the county court that a majority of votes were in favor of license held not over- come by an abstract of the vote filed by the Point annotated. See syllabus.
election commissioners, certificate to which does not cover the question of license. - State v. Songer (Ark.) 903. Under Sayles' Ann. Civ. St. 1897, art. 3393, a local option election, held more than two years after the last preceding election, is not invalid because the result of the preceding elec- tion was published within two years.-Ex parte Smith (Tex. Cr. App.) 245.
An order for a local option election may be made either at a regular or special session of the commissioners' court.-Koch v. State (Tex. Cr. App.) 809.
2. Licenses and taxes.
A liquor license is a mere privilege, subject to revocation.-Sarlo v. Pulaski County (Ark.) 953.
A county court, authorized to issue licenses for the sale of liquors, held empowered to im- pose a condition forfeiting the license on the licensee violating the law.-Sarlo v. Pulaski County (Ark.) 953.
*Under Kirby's Dig. § 5120, a county court, authorized to issue licenses, held required to treat alike all applicants possessing the legal qualifications.-Sarlo v. Pulaski County (Ark.)
The posting of notices for the application for a liquor license held not a compliance with Ky. St. 1903, § 4203.-Commonwealth v. Red- man (Ky.) 1073.
*Ky. St. 1903, § 4203, held to authorize the county court to grant liquor licenses only in the case the proper notice for the application therefor has been given.-Commonwealth v. Redman (Ky.) 1073.
Transaction held to constitute a transfer of a
dramshop license within the prohibition of Rev. St. 1899, § 2992.-Sawyer v. Sanderson (Mo. App.) 151.
Contract, including as an indivisible part | thereof the transfer of a liquor license, held void under Rev. St. 1899, § 2992, and other provisions of the dramshop act.-Sawyer v. Sanderson (Mo. App.) 151.
Under Rev. St. 1899, §§ 2993, 2997, where a petition was filed for dramshop license in May, 1904, and was not acted on until January, 1905, the commissioner was without jurisdiction to grant a license to continue for a term of six months from the latter date.-State ex rel. Sager v. Mulvihill (Mo. App.) 773.
In a prosecution for violating the local option law, held error to refuse an instruction that the defendant was not guilty if the liquor sold was a medical preparation, and was not an intoxi- cating liquor when drunk in such quantities as could be practically drunk.-Pearce v. State (Tex. Cr. App.) 234.
Defendant held not guilty if the liquor sold contained various drugs as ingredients, and the intoxication of a person taking it was the re- sult of the drugs, and not of any intoxicating liquor contained in the preparation.-Pearce v. State (Tex. Cr. App.) 234.
Defendant held guilty of violating the local option law. Sliger v. State (Tex. Cr. App.) 243.
for the revenue license on the brandy, he was guilty of a sale of intoxicating liquor.-Barnes v. State (Tex. Cr. App.) 804.
Where the owner of fruit has it manufactured into liquor, receiving the product of the identi- cal fruit furnished, the distiller is not guilty of a sale of liquor; but if the fruit is ex- changed for liquor already manufactured, or if the distiller furnishes the owner of the fruit
liquor in advance, the transaction is a sale.- Barnes v. State (Tex. Cr. App.) 805. § 4. Criminal prosecutions.
Proof of selling "beer" to a minor without proof that it was intoxicating, does not warrant conviction.-Cassens v. State (Tex. Cr. App.)
On a prosecution for the sale of intoxicating liquor on Sunday in violation of Pen. Code 1895, art. 199, whether sale of a lunch in connection with a purported gift of the liquor was in fact a sale of the liquor held a question for the jury. —Savage v. State (Tex. Ĉr. App.) 351.
In a prosecution for violation of the local option law, evidence held to require submission to the jury of the question whether the trans- action was a sale or a gift.-Barnes v. State (Tex. Cr. App.) 805.
In a prosecution for violating the local op- tion law, testimony that witness had drunk liquor at the same place some years before the sale in question held inadmissible.-Rutherford v. State (Tex. Cr. App.) 810.
In a prosecution for violating the local op- tion law, evidence of prior sale of certain liquid held inadmissible to prove the intoxicating property of the liquid in question.-Rutherford v. State (Tex. Cr. App.) 810.
In prosecution for violating local option law, charge held to improperly place the burden of proof of nonintoxicating character of liquor sold on defendant.-Rutherford v. State (Tex. Cr. App.) 810.
In a prosecution for violating the local option law, requested instruction on the properties of the drink sold should have been given.- Rutherford v. State (Tex. Cr. App.) 810.
Pen. Code 1895, art. 200, authorizing res- taurants to keep open on Sunday, does not ex- empt restaurant keepers from the penalty pro- Of causes of action, see "Action," § 3. vided by article 199 for the sale of intoxicating liquors on Sunday.-Savage v. State (Tex. Cr. App.) 351.
Where an employé of the owner of a still delivered brandy in exchange for peaches and
The relation of joint purchasers of property is fiduciary, and one will not be permitted to ac- * Point annotated. See syllabus.
« AnteriorContinuar » |