Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

Construction.

5. A contract to establish a college "in" a
certain town does not require it to be placed
within the corporate limits when a large num
ber of the inhabitants of the town dwell be-
yond such limits. Rogers v. Galloway Female
College (Ark.)
636
6. A contract to establish a college "at" a
certain town does not require that it should be
placed within the corporate limits.
Id.

7. A private understanding with one of
four persons who make equal subscriptions, to
the effect that other persons will raise and pay
a part of his subscription, will not release one
of the other four, where this agreement did not
amount to a release of the subscriber from any
part of his subscription.
Id.
8. A subscriber to a fund to be given for
securing the location of a college at a certain
place on condition that a specified sum is raised
cannot avoid his subscription by showing a
deficiency in the amount after it has been ac-
cepted as sufficient by the party establishing
the college, where he was a leading spirit in
the enterprise, knew the subscribers, and knew
what was demanded.

Id.

[blocks in formation]

16. A judgment upon a tort is not a con-
tract, within the meaning of the constitutional
provision against impairing the obligation of
258
contracts. Sherman v. Langham (Tex.)

17. The remedy on promissory notes and
warrants of attorney by statutes in force at
the time that they were made, which author-
ized the holder to enter judgment, issue ex-
ecution, and levy upon and sell the debtor's
property notwithstanding any assignment for
creditors which he might make more than
sixty days after their issue, constitutes an es-
sential part of the contracts or securities, and
cannot be taken away by a subsequent statute
which attempts to provide that all levies or
other processes shall be dissolved by such an
assignment. Second Ward Sav. Bank v.
Schranck (Wis.)

NOTES AND BRIEFS.

TENT PERSONS.

569

9. A college established by a church pur- Contracts; capacity to make, see INCOMPE-
suant to subscriptions and propositions there-
for is the beneficiary of the subscriptions,
standing in loco ecclesia as to the right to sue
upon it.

Validity.

Id.

[blocks in formation]

11. An action on a contract which is not
only declared unlawful by statute, but is made
a penal offense, cannot be maintained. Raleigh
& G. R. Co. v. Swanson (Ga.)
275

12. A contract between a railroad company
and a ticket broker, whereby the latter is en-
abled to sell tickets to individuals over the com-
pany's lines for interstate transportation at less
than the established rate for the sale of tickets
by its regular agents, between the same points
and for the same accommodation, is in viola
tion of the act of Congress of Feb. 4, 1887, to
regulate commerce.

Id.

13. The exposure of holders of patents cov
ering similar articles to litigation will not jus-
tify them in making a combination in restraint
of competition. National Harrow Co. v.
Hench (C. C. App. 3d C.)
299
14. An agreement to sell no harrow for less
than the schedule price is invalid when made
y the owner of the patent with a corporatiion
organized by rival manufacturers of harrows
to take title to the patents and license the
former owners to operate under them and sell
only at schedule prices to be fixed by the cor-
poration.

Fictitious names in, see NAME.

Effect of statute of frauds upon contracts
between sureties to fix their shares of liability.
378

For permanent employment; mutuality 467
Wagers on race

835

[blocks in formation]

CORPORATIONS. See also BUILDING

AND LOAN ASSOCIATIONS;, CONFLICT OF
LAWS, 2; ESTOPPEL, 3-5; EVIDENCE, 4;
INJUNCTION, 1; LIFE TENANT, 2, 3; RE-
CEIVERS, 1-3, 7; WAREHOUSEMEN, 3;
WRIT AND PROCESS.

1. The subjection of what purports to be
a corporation but has no legal existence, as
such because of the nonpayment of the bonus
tax imposed by Md. act 1890, chap. 536, to a
suit by the state for the recovery of the tax
by Md. Code, § 88h, does not, by implication,
give it a legal existence for all purposes, in-
cluding a capacity to sue, as it is expressly de-
nied the exercise of any corporate powers un-
til the bonus is paid, by § 8Eƒ. Maryland
Tube & I Works v. West End Improv. Co.
(Md.)

810

2. The lack of the corporate existence of
the plaintiff suing as a corporation can be set
up to defeat the action by the defendant, where
this is based on the failure of the plaintiff to
15. Efforts to prevent competition to re-pay the bonus tax prescribed by Md. Acts

Id.

benefit.

1890, chap. 536, under which such nonpay-ness; depositing securities in trust; for whose
ment prevents the attempted corporation from
having or exercising any corporate powers. Id.
Powers.

3. The plea of ultra vires will not be al-
lowed to prevail when it will not advance jus-
tice, but will, on the contrary, accomplish a
legal wrong. Lewis v. American Sav. & L.
A880. (Wis.)

559
4. An extension of the business of a cor-
poration into another state is within the power
of the directors.
Id.

By-laws.

5. By-laws providing that the transfer of
the stock of an irrigation company shall be
made only with the land for which it was is-
sued do not apply to a sale of delinquent stock
for assessments, as the purchaser is not a trans-
feree of the former owner of the stock. Spur
geon v. Santa Ana Valley Irrig. Co. (Cal.) 701

6. The rights of a purchaser of delin-
quent stock sold for assessments must be de-
termined by the general law, if no provision
therefor is made by the charter or by-
laws, and general provisions of a by-law as to
transfer of shares of stock do not apply. Id.

Forfeiture.

7. An act of a corporation tending to
produce injury to the public by affecting the
welfare of the people is an abuse of its cor-
porate franchise for which the charter of the
company may be forfeited by an information
in the nature of quo warranto. People, Mc
Ilhany, v. Chicago Live-Stock Exch. (11.) 373
Insolvency.

Failure to perfect; status of.
By-laws as to transfer of stock.
Preference to creditors of.

562

811

701

254

362

Status of unauthorized foreign companies.

[blocks in formation]

8. The invalidity of an attachment of prop-
3. The maintenance of a county asylum
erty of an insolvent corporation will not pre- does not become a private business such that
clude a purchaser of the property from defend- the county is liable for injuries received by em-
ing against one claiming it under a mortgage ployees, by reason of the fact that some reve
which constitutes an invalid preference. Four-nue is incidentally derived by the county from
ler v. Bell (Tex.)
the sale of surplus farm products and from
payments made by those liable for the support
of insane persons kept in the asylum. Hughes
v. Monroe County (N. Y.)
33

Foreign corporations.

254

9. Members of a company incorporated in
another state, who organize and choose direc-
tors in Florida and undertake to carry on the
4. A county is not liable for injuries re
corporate business in that state without be- ceived by an employee from a defective ma
coming incorporated therein, are liable as part-chine in an asylum which was maintained by
ners in the business. Taylor v. Branham the county in discharge of its duty as a politi
(Fla.)
362 cal division of the state to care for its insane.
Hughes v. Monroe County (N. Y.)

33

10. A corporation created under the laws
of another jurisdiction cannot exercise cor-
5. No new liability for torts is imposed
porate functions in Florida without becoming upon a county by a statute making it a munie-
incorporated under its laws, and its liabilities ipal corporation for exercising the powers and
contracted there while unincorporated therein discharging the duties of local government
rest upon its members or stockholders in the and the administration of public affairs, and
jurisdiction as partners.
Id. providing that actions for damages for any in-
liable shall be in the name of the county.
jury to any property or rights for which it is
Markey v. Queens County (N. Y.)

11. The compliance by a foreign building

and loan association with the laws of the state
which created it need not be investigated by
the authorities of another state in which it de-

posits securities as required by statute in order
to obtain a license to do business therein.
Lewis v. American Sav. & L. Asso. (Wis.) 559

12. A deposit of securities by a foreign cor-
poration as required by law in order to obtain
the right to do business in the state is not ultra
vires.

NOTES AND BRIEFS.

Id.

[blocks in formation]

Liabilities of counties in actions for torts and
negligence:-(I.) Injuries to travelers and ve-
hicles: (a) by bridges and approaches being
out of repair: (1) implied liability; (2) where
Corporations; conditions of right to do busi- statute imposes liability; (b) from defective

See also LIFE TENANTS.

partition sale in an action to which she was
not a party, notwithstanding Ind. Rev. Stat.
1894, 2660, providing that no sale of the hus-
band's property by virtue of any decree to
which she shall not be a party shall affect her
rights, as that section applies only where the
wife is a necessary party, which she is not in
such action.
Id.

4. The effect of the deed in a partition sale
is not reduced to that merely of co-owners so
as to leave the property subject to the inchoate
dower rights of their wives, by a statute pro-
viding that the conveyances shall bar all claims
of such owners to said lands as effectually as if
they themselves had executed the same. Id.

5. A statute providing that a judicial sale
of a man's property in a suit to which his wife
is not a party shall not prejudice her dower
rights has no effect in case of a sale for parti-
tion of land in which he has an undivided in-
terest, where another statute designating the
persons to be made parties to partition proceed-
ings does not recognize her as a necessary one.
NOTES AND BRIEFS.

Id.

Dower; inchoate interest of wife under stat-
utes; effect of partition.

See INNKEEPERS, 2.

DRUMMERS.

DRUNKENNESS.
LAW, 1.

384

lineman to inspect and test for himself the guy
wires or circuit breakers of an electric-railroad
company, which uses the same poles that are
used by the telephone company when it fur-
nishes him with suitable appliances for that
purpose, and he knows that there are no other
persons employed to do such testing. Id.

4. The right of a telephone lineman to as-
sume that an electric-railroad company has
used suitable and safe appliances to prevent the
escape of electricity from its main or trolley
wire to the guy wires does not excuse him
from exercising proper care to prevent injury,
when he knows as a fact that the wires are not
safe.
Id.
NOTES AND BRIEFS.

Electrical uses; negligence as to dangerous.
wires.
192

Electricity; use of, in street, as a nuisance.

621

ELECTRIC RAILWAYS. See EMINENT
DOMAIN, 6, 9.

ELEVATED RAILROADS. See IN-
JUNCTION, 5, 6.

ELEVATORS.

1. An ascending and descending cage of
See also CRIMINAL an elevator is such an attraction to children
that an unguarded or open door or one which
may readily be opened from the outside, may
constitute negligence on the part of the owner
when children are allowed to play where they

NOTES AND BRIEFS.

See also WILLS.

Drunkenness; municipal regulation of, as a may be injured by it. Siddall v. Jansen (Ill.)

nuisance.

EASEMENTS. See PARTITION, 3, 4.

EJECTMENT.

524

1. Ejectment may be maintained to com-
pel the removal of telegraph poles from a pub.
lic highway over plaintiff's land on which the
line constitutes an additional burden for which
compensation has not been made to the owner.
Postal Teleg. Cable Co. v. Eaton (Ill.)

112

2. Failure to comply with the provisions
of an ordinance respecting the doors of ele-
vators will render the owner liable for an in-
jury received in consequence by a child which
was rightfully at the place of the injury. Id.
EMBEZZLEMENT.

A receiver who un'awfully appropriates
money which comes into his hands as receiver,
722
or fails to account for or pay over the same on
demand, is not within Kan. Comp. Laws 1889,

2. A transfer of land over which a tele-
graph line has been constructed without right
gives the purchaser all his grantor's rights,
including the right to bring ejectment. Id.
ELECTRICAL USES AND APPLI.
ANCES. See also CARRIERS, 6; EVI-
DENCE, 8.

1. The breaking of a live electric wire
which falls to the ground and causes the death
of a person touching it does not render the
owner liable, if it was due entirely to accident
which no reasonable human care could pre-
vent. Snyder v. Wheeler Electrical Co. (W.Va.)
499

2. The use of the same poles by a tele-
phone company and an electric-railroad com-
pany, at the request of the municipal authori-
ties, is not unlawful when it is not shown to
be necessarily attended with increased danger.
Bergin v. Southern New England Teleph. Co.
(Conn.)

192

3. A telephone company may require its

2220, providing that if any "agent" shall
neglect or refuse to deliver to his "employer
or employers," on demand, any money which
has come into his possession by virtue of such
employment, he shall on conviction be pun-
ished. State v. Hubbard (Kan.)
860
EMINENT DOMAIN. See also CONSTI-
TUTIONAL LAW, 1, 7; GAS, 1; INJUNC-
TION, 8, 9.

1. A liberal construction should be given
to the constitutional provision for just compen-
sation to the owners of property taken or dam-
aged for public use. Searle v. Lead (S. D.)

345

2. Damages by the grading of a street in
front of one's premises, although no prior
grade had been established, are within the pro-
visions of the Constitution against taking or
damaging property without just compensation.

Id.

3. No admission that any damage will be

caused by the grading of a street is necessary
to the filing of a petition by the city, under S.
D. Acts 1891, chap. 94, providing for the as-
certainment of damages before taking or dam-
aging private property for public use. Id.
4. The ascertainment and payment of
damages that may be caused by a change of
grade of a street is a condition precedent to the
right of the municipality to proceed under a
Constitution providing for just compensa-
tion to the owners of property taken or dam
aged for public use.

Id.

5. Damages for injuries caused to an abut-
ting lot by being left 8 or 10 feet above the
street by change of grade must be paid by the
city to the lotowner, under a Constitution pro-
viding compensation for property taken, in
jured, or destroyed, for public use. Hender-
son v. McClain (Ky.)
349
6. Poles for a trolley railroad, set at stated
distances on either side of tracks near the mar-
gin of a street, on which wires are placed, con-
stitute an additional burden upon the street.
Jaynes v. Omaha Street R. Co. (Neb.) 751

7. A telegraph line is an additional burden
on the fee of a public highway, for which
compensation must be made to the owner.
Postal Teleg. Cable Co. v. Eaton (Ill.) 722
8. The motive power which moves vehi-
cles on a street does not determine whether or
not an additional burden is imposed upon the
easement, but that question depends on the
exclusiveness and permanency of the occupa-
tion of any portion of the street. Jaynes v.
Omaha Street R. Co. (Neb.)
751
9. The depreciation of the property of
abutting owners by the exclusive use of a
portion of the street by a trolley company's
poles and wires gives a right to compensa-
tion under Neb. Const. art. 1, § 21, which pro-
vides that property shall not be "taken or
damaged" for public use without just com-
pensation.

NOTES AND BRIEFS.

ld.

Eminent domain; injuring property with-
out compensation.

[blocks in formation]

3. The doctrine of estoppel cannot be suc-
cessfully invoked against the denial of corpo-
rate existence unless the corporation has at
least a de facto existence. Maryland Tube &
I. Works v. West End Improv. Co. (Md.) 810

4. A corporation is not estopped from de-
nying that it is a warehouseman, or that its re-
ceipts, as such, are valid, as against a holder
of them who took them with knowledge of the
facts respecting the character and powers of
the corporation. Franklin Nat. Bank v.
Whitehead (Ind.)

725

5. A foreign corporation as well as its
stockholders and receiver are estopped from
disputing the validity of a trust upon which
the corporation deposited securities as a condi-
tion of the license to do business in the state.
Lewis v. American Sav. & L. A880. (Wis.) 559

6. A party to an action who procures from
the presiding judge a ruling that a specified
judgment is valid and legal, as the result of
which the case is adjudicated in his favor, is
estopped in a subsequent litigation with the
same adverse party to deny the validity or le-
gality of such judgment. Luther v. Clay
(Ga.)

EVICTION.

95

See LANDLORD AND TEN-

ANT, 4.
EVIDENCE. See also APPEAL AND ER-
ROR, 9, 11, 13, 18, 22, 25, 26; TRIAL, 2, 3, 5.
Judicial notice.

1. The source, course, and destination of
346, 349 the rivers of the state are a matter of judicial
Extent of rights acquired by; right to enter cognizance. People v. Truckee Lumber Co.

and remove property.

Additional burden on highway.
Additional burden of street railway.

EQUITY.

533 (Cal.)

581

722 Presumptions and burden of proof.
752 2. The one alleging the unconstitutional-
ity of a statute has the burden of substantiat-
ing his claim. Cook v. Fogarty (Iowa) 488
absence of proof, to prevail in a sister state
3. The common law is presumed, in the
which was once under the jurisdiction of Eng-
land. Gooch v. Faucette (N. C.)

An available legal defense to a pending
action at law which is furnished by a valid re-
lease will not prevent equitable relief in favor
of the defendant when the trial of the action
at law might affect his reputation and charac-
ter in the community by reason of charges and
revelations as to his past conduct, whether real
or fabricated, on which the action was based.
Bomeisler v. Forster (N. Y.)
240

[blocks in formation]

835

4. It is a reasonable presumption that s
foreign corporation which has obtained a li-
cense by depositing securities which it had
agreed to do and which the law required as a
condition of the license did so in the manner
and for the purposes prescribed by the law.
Lewis v. American Sav. & L. Asso. (Wis.) 559

5. The presumption, from the fact of the
partition of the surface of land by parol, is that
it includes the coal beneath as well as the sur-
face; and one who denies it has the burden of
proof. Byers v. Byers (Pa.)
537
6. The mere happening of an accident is

not sufficient to show negligence as between | and signed it under an agreement with the
persons having no contract relations with each payee that the principal only should be liable.
other if other evidence shows due care under Shuey v. Adair (Wash.)
473
the circumstances.
17. Parol evidence is admissible to show
ning Co. (Pa.)

Stearns v. Ontario Spin-

842

fraudulent misrepresentations by the vendor as
7. An accident which in the ordinary to the quantity of the land sold, though not in
course of things could not have happened if any manner incorporated in the deed consum-
proper care had been used affords reasonable mating the contract. Gustafson v. Rustemeyer
evidence, in the absence of explanation, that (Conn.)
it arose from want of care. Snyder v. Wheel-
ing Electrical Co. (W. Va.)

499
8. The presumption of negligence from
the breaking of a live electric wire and its fall
to the ground is not final or conclusive, but
may be repelled by evidence.
Id.

9. A carrier has the burden of showing
that its conductor, in beating a passenger in al-
leged self-defense, used no more force than ap-
peared to him, as a reasonable man, necessary
to repel the assault. St. Louis S. W. R. Co.
v. Jones (Ark.)
784
10. The burden is on defendant in a mur
der trial in Ohio, who sets up insanity as a de-
fense, to establish it by a preponderance of the
evidence; but the proof should be deemed to
preponderate in favor of insanity whenever its
existence is made probable upon a full and
fair consideration of all the evidence ad-
duced for and against it. Kelch v. State (Ohio)
737

Best evidence.

644

18. A devise absolute in form cannot be
shown by oral evidence to be in trust for other
persons. Moran v. Moran (Iowa) 204
Opinions.

19. The opinion of a witness is of no value
on the question whether or not a particular
place at which there is a railroad switch, to
which the switch engine frequently runs, is
within the depot grounds or yard limits. Rab-
idon v. Chicago & W. M. R. Co. (Mich.) 405

20. After one accused of murder has offered
evidence of his demeanor for the purpose of
convincing the jury of his insanity at the time
of trial, for the purpose of raising the pre-
sumption of insanity when the crime was com-
mitted, a person who is acquainted with him
may testify that he is simulating. Burt v.
State (Tex.)
305

21. An opinion as to sanity may be given
by a nonexpert witness who has given a very
full detail of the facts upon which the opinion
Id.

is based.

11. A contractor for city work cannot state 22. A hypothetical question by contestant to
from memory the state of his accounts with an expert witness upon the question of inca-
the city at a certain time, when books show-pacity of a testator need embrace only the facts
ing such facts are accessible. Greenville v. Or- which the evidence of the contestant tends to
mand (S. C.)
prove, and not those alleged by proponents,
Documentary.
which he denies, or those which are irrelevant.
Re Miller (Pa.)

847

220

12. Legislative journals are competent evi-
dence to show that a bill was not passed in
23. Testimony that a person "looked very
accordance with mandatory provisions of the bad; he was lame and he could scarcely get
Constitution. Stanly County v. Snuggs (N. C.) get up stairs," is not inadmissible on an issue
439 as to his condition at a certain time. Balti
more City Pass. R. Co. v. Nugent (Md.) 161
Declarations; res gestæ.

13. A properly authenticated record of con-
viction of crime in a Federal court may by
statute be made admissible in a proceeding to
disbar the accused as an attorney in a state
court. Re Kirby (S. D.)

24. Testimony of a defendant that he did
not instruct his counsel in the matter, but that
856 he acted altogether on the advice of the coun-
14. An agreed statement of facts upon which sel, is admissible where he is charged with act-
a case was tried without a jury, although noting maliciously in making a complaint on
absolutely binding on the parties in a jury trial which a hearing as to the insanity of another
was based. Porter v. Řitch (Conn.)
of another case between them involving the person
353
same issues, is admissible in evidence on the
latter trial at the instance of one party against
the other, subject to the latter's right to dis-
prove, rebut, or explain any statement con-
tained therein. Luther v. Clay (Ga.) 95

Demonstrative.

25. Sureties cannot testify to instructions to
the maker as to the disposition of the notes
against the holder unless he is shown to have
knowledge of them. Greenville v. Ormand
(S. C.)
847

26. The absence of the sureties on a note at

15. Evidence obtained by forcibly entering the time of its attempted negotiation will not
the house of an accused person and searching preclude testimony as to what then took place
it and the person accused, without any warrant being given by one who, after the refusal of
or authority of law, is not inadmissible to show the payee to discount it, advanced money on
the possession of articles tending to establish the note which was committed by the sureties
guilt, although the search and seizure may to the maker's hands for negotiation.
have been unlawful, unwarranted, unreason-
able, and reprehensible.
(Ga.)

Oral, as to writings.

Williams v. State
269

16. Oral evidence is inadmissible to show
that the maker of a note was only an agent

Id.

27. Testimony that the members of a club
considered a certain paper one of the strongest
they had had read before them is incompetent
as hearsay. Porter v. Ritch (Conn.) 353
Relevancy.

28. Evidence of acts of an agent of a de-

« AnteriorContinuar »