MALICIOUS PROSECUTION.

1. The defendant in a criminal prosecution was found guilty; but the verdict was set aside by the court, and afterwards a nol. pros. was entered. Held, (1) that there was a sufficient termination of the case to support an action for malicious prosecution; (2) that the verdict, having been set aside, was no evidence of probable cause. - Richter v. Koster, 45 Ind. 440.

2. The dismissal by the plaintiff or prosecutor of a civil or criminal proceeding is a sufficient termination of it to support an action for malicious prosecution. Marbourg v. Smith, 11 Kans. 554; Kelley v. Sage, 12 Kans. 109.

See CORPORATION, 5; EVIDence, 2.

MARRIAGE. See CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, 1.

A mortgage was made, describing by mistake land not owned by the mortgagor, and different from that intended to be mortgaged. Afterward judgments were recovered against the mortgagor, which were a lien on his lands, and which were assigned for valuable consideration to a purchaser who had no notice of the mistake in the mortgage. Held, that the mortgagee could not maintain a bill against the mortgagor and the assignee of the judgments, to have the mortgage reformed so as to cover the land originally intended. - Flanders v. Ò'Brien, 46 Ind. 284.

MONEY. - See CONFEDERATE MONEY; DURESS.

MONEY PAID.

1. A statute established a police court in a city, to be held in such place as the city should provide. The city having failed to provide any place, the judge hired a court-room, paid the rent, and presented bills for it to the city council, by whom they were referred to a committee, but no further action was taken on them. Held, that the city was not liable to the judge for the rent paid by him. (TAPLEY, DICKERSON, and BARROWS, JJ., dissenting.) — French v. Auburn, 62 Me. 452.

2. Plaintiff lent money to H., taking therefor a check made by H. to the order of defendant, who had no interest in the loan, and indorsed by him, with knowledge of all the facts. Held, that defendant was liable on a count for money paid. Emery v. Hobson, 62 Me. 578.

MORTGAGE.-Sec CONFLICT OF LAWS, 2; FRAUDULENT CONVEYANCE, 1;

MISTAKE.

MOTHER. See PARENT.

MUNICIPAL CORPORATION.

1. The cornice of a building projected over a public street in a city, in such a manner as to be dangerous to passers-by, of which the city had notice. Held, (1) that the city might abate the cornice as a nuisance; (2) that, having failed to do so, it was liable to a person injured while passing on the street, by the fall of the cornice. Grove v. Fort Wayne, 45 Ind. 429.

2. By a city charter, power was conferred on the aldermen, common council, and school committee to decide on all questions relative to the qualifications, elections, and returns of their respective members. Held, that a decision of the school committee that a certain person had not been legally elected a member of that body was conclusive, and that the court would not consider the reasons of such decision, though they appeared on the record of the committee. — Peabody v. School Committee of Boston, 115 Mass. 383.

3. Property of a defendant in the hands of a municipal corporation is subject to process of foreign attachment. Wilson v. Lewis, 10 R. I. 285.

See CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, STATE, 4, 8; MONEY PAID, 1; SALE; Way.

NAME. See AMENDMENT.

NATIONAL BANK.

National banks, organized under act of Congress, are not bound by the usury laws of the States where they are established. —Central National Bank v. Pratt, 115 Mass. 539.

See ILLEGAL CONTRACT, 2.

NEGLIGENCE.

See ACTION, 2, 5, 6; CARRIER, 2; CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE; EVIDENCE, 6; MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, 1; NUISANCE; PROXIMATE CAUSE. NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS. See BILLS AND NOTES.

NEW TRIAL,

A jury assessed damages by a correct rule, disregarding an erroneous instruction of the court. Held, that the verdict should stand. — Menzies v. Kennedy, 9 Nev. 152.

NOLLE PROSEQUI. See MALICIOUS PROSECUTION, 1, 2.

Defendant was lessee of a pier, which he covenanted with the landlord to keep in repair. He sublet the pier, after which it became ruinous, and plaintiff, coming upon it lawfully and with due care, was injured by reason of its defective condition. Held, that defendant was not liable. -Clancy v. Byrne, 56 N. Y. 129.

See ACTION, 3; MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, 1.

NUNCUPATIVE WILL.

By statute, a nuncupative will is allowed to be good only when made in the testator's last sickness. In a case where such a will was offered for probate, and proved to have been so made, held, that it was immaterial whether the testator had time, after making such will, and before his death, to make a will in writing. - Nolan v. Gardner, 7 Heisk. 215.

The mother of an infant daughter, after the father's death, is entitled to the daughter's services, and can therefore maintain an action for her seduction, even

though she is in the actual service of another person at the time of the seduction. (ALLEN and FOLGER, JJ., dissenting.) — Furman v. Van Sise, 56 N. Y. 435. See DAMAGES, 1.

PARTITION.

The owner of land conveyed an undivided share of it, by warranty deed containing, after the description and before the habendum, this clause: “to remain in common and undivided." Held, that he was not estopped to sue his grantee for partition. Spaulding v. Woodward, 53 N. H. 573.

See ESTOPPEL.

PARTNERSHIP.

1. By contract between A. and B. it was agreed that A. should furnish farming land and implements, and B. should furnish labor, the crops raised to be equally divided between them. Held, not a partnership. — Mann v. Taylor, 5 Heisk. 267.

2. In assumpsit against three, two were defaulted, and the only question tried was whether the third defendant was a partner of the others. The jury were instructed to find that he was so, if he did business with them under an agreement to share the gross receipts. Held, that this direction was wrong; such agreement being evidence, but not conclusive, of a partnership. — Eastman v. Clark, 53 N. H. 276.

See ACCESSION.

PARTY-WALL.

By contract not under seal between A. and B., adjoining land-owners, it was agreed that A. might build a wall on the division line, and that B., his heirs or assigns, whenever they should use the wall, would pay to A., his heirs or assigns, half the cost of it. Held, that A.'s grantee could not sue B.'s grantee at law to recover half the cost of the wall. —Joy v. Boston Penny Savings Bank, 115 Mass. 60.

PASSENGER. See CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE; DAMAGES, 3.

1. Sparks from a locomotive kindled fires on land of two different owners. The fires united, and spread, and finally reached and destroyed property on plaintiff's land, three or four miles distant from the railroad track. Held, that the railroad company was liable to plaintiff. — Atchison, Topeka, & Santa Fe R.R. Co. v. Stamford, 12 Kans. 354.

2. Defendants negligently piled boards in a public highway; a cart loaded with barrels was driven over the boards, making a rattling noise, which frightened plaintiff's horse, and caused him to run away, whereby plaintiff was injured. Held, that whether defendants' act was the proximate cause of the injury was a question for the jury. - Lake v. Milliken, 62 Me. 240.

3. A railroad train running three quarters of an hour behind time was upset by a gust of wind which crossed the track, but not that part of the track where the train would have been if on time. Held, that the negligence of the railroad company was not the proximate cause of the accident, and that the company was not liable for injuries caused thereby to a passenger on the train. - McClary v. Sioux City & Pacific R.R. Co., 3 Neb. 44.

See CARRIER, 2.

RAILROAD.-See AGENT; CARRIER, 3; CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, STATE; CONTRIBUTORY Negligence; DamaGES, 3; EVIDENCE, 6; ILLEGAL Contract, 1; PROXIMATE CAUSE, 3.

RATIFICATION.

One who had given a promissory note, the consideration of which was Confederate money, by his will directed that the note should be paid. Held, that his executor might nevertheless resist payment, on the ground of illegality of the consideration. Dittmar v. Myers, 39 Tex. 295,

Certain persons organized themselves under a general statute, into a corporation, as a "Unitarian Society of Christians," and continued to hold property and conduct public worship as such, until the pastor publicly avowed that he was "neither a Unitarian nor a Christian." He continued to preach his own doctrines in the meeting-house of the society, and was supported by a majority of the society. The minority filed a bill against the majority and the pastor, praying an injunction to restrain the preaching of such doctrines in the meetinghouse. Held, that the injunction should be granted. (DoE, J., dissenting.) - Hale v. Everett, 53 N. H. 1.

Action on a promissory note. Defence, usury. Held, that the defence was good, though the usury laws had been repealed since action brought. — Smith v. Glanton, 39 Tex. 365.

REPLEVIN. See BILL OF LADING; FRAUDS, STATUTE OF,

RESTRAINT OF TRADE..

RESTRICTION.

See ILLEGAL CONTRACT, 1.

See EASEMENT, 1.

4.

A building belonging to a city was sold by auction, with a stipulation that it should be removed in five days. The city authorities refused to grant a license to remove the building as a whole; and the purchaser failed to remove it during five days, whereupon it was resold by the city. Held, neither a conversion nor a breach of contract. Woodward v. Boston, 115 Mass. 81.

See DECEIT; FRAUDS, STATUTE OF, 2, 3, 4, 6; JUDICIAL SALE; LORD'S DAY; WARRANTY.

Where a statute defines larceny as the taking and carrying away of any valuable thing, words charging the stealing of a dog impute larceny, and are actionable per se. - Harrington v. Miles, 11 Kans. 480.

See EVIDENCE, 4.

SLAVE.

The abolition of slavery is no defence to an action of detinue for slaves, commenced before such abolition. -Wilkerson v. McDougal, 48 Ala. 517.

See ACTION, 1.

SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE.

Equity will not enforce specific performance of a covenant in a lease, on the part of the lessor, to repair damages caused by fire. — Beck v. Altison, 56 N. Y. 366.

See FRAUDS, Statute of, 2.

STAMP.

Where a written contract was not stamped as required by the laws of the United States, held, that neither the contract itself, nor parol proof of its contents when the original was lost, was admissible in evidence in a state court. Turner v. The State, 48 Ala. 549. But see Miller v. Morrow, 5 Heisk. 688.

STATUTE.

1. The court adjudged a statute void, because it appeared by the journals of the legislature, of which judicial notice was taken, not to have been passed according to the forms of the constitution. - Moody v. The State, 48 Ala. 115.

2. A statute providing for payment of the debt of a particular county, held, a general and not a special law. (HAWLEY, J., dissenting.) — Youngs v. Hall, 9 Nev. 212.

See CONSTITUTIONAL LAW; CONSTITUTIONAL Law, State, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8.

STATUTE OF FRAUDS.

See FRAUDS, STATUTE OF.

-See LIMITATIONS, STATUTE OF.

STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS.