« PreviousContinue »
CONSTITUTIONAL Law, State. 1. A constitutional provision that “no person shall be imprisoned for debt" does not forbid imprisonment for non-payment of the costs of a criminal prosecution. - Morgan v. The State, 47 Ala. 34.
2. A statute making certain persons a corporation and authorizing them to build and repair roads, bridges, and drains, and to assess the expense thereof on lands benefited thereby, held, unconstitutional, as an unwarranted delegation of the power to tax. — Gage v. Graham, 57 III. 144.
3. Prosecution for violation of a city ordinance, held, to be properly brought in the name of the city, notwithstanding a constitutional provision that “all prosecutions shall be conducted in the name and by the authority of the state." - Davenport v. Bird, 34 Iowa, 524.
4. A statute requiring that the party demanding a jury shall pay the jury fee, held, constitutional. — Randall v. Kehlor, 60 Me. 37.
5. The legislature cannot constitutionally authorize a town to loan its credit to persons who will, in consideration thereof, maintain a manufacturing enterprise in the town for their own private emolument. — Allen v. Jay, 60 Me. 124. See STATUTE; VOTER.
CONTRACT. 1. Plaintiff agreed to serve as a substitute in the army for a year, in con sideration of a certain sum. Before the year expired, the war ended, and plaintiff was discharged from the service. Held, that he was entitled to the full amount agreed upon. - Leas v. Patterson, 38 Ind. 465.
2. Where the law forbids the employment of an uncertificated person as teacher, a contract to employ such a person is valid if he obtains a certificate before acting as teacher. - School District No. 2 in Oxford v. Dilman, 22 Ohio St. 194.
See ATTACHMENT, 2; BILLS AND NOTES; CONFLICT OF Laws, 1; CORPORATION, 1; EVIDENCE, 5; FRAUDS, STATUTE OF, 1, 2, 3; ILLEGAL CONTRACT; INCUMBRANCE; LEASE; MORTGAGE; PARTNERSHIP; SPECIFIO PERFORMANCE; TELEGRAPH; Usury, 1, 2, 3; War.
CONTRIBUTION. — See Action, 1; DEVISE.
CORPORATION. 1. An agreement of the holders of a majority of the shares in the stock of a corporation, to elect the officers of the company and manage its affairs as they or a majority of them shall determine, is not illegal or void as against public policy. — Faulds v. Yates, 57 Ill. 416.
2. M. was pledgee of stock, the certificates of which stood in the name of “M., trustee,” and he had repeatedly voted on them without objection. Held, (1.) That M. was entitled to vote, in the absence of any claim by the pledgors to do so. (2.) That the corporation was not bound to take notice of such claim until it was established in a court of equity. (3.) That after the election it was too late for the pledgors to ask the court to disturb the result. — Hoppin v. Buffum, 9 R. I. 513.
3. It does not require an unanimous vote of the members of a corporation to surrender its franchise. — Wilson v. Proprietors of Central Bridge, 9 R. I. 590.
4. Plaintiff, a resident of New York, lent money, taking as security a certificate of stock in the defendant's company, a Massachusetts corporation, standing in the name of “B., trustee," and accompanied by a blank power of attorney to transfer the stock, signed “B., trustee.” After the date of the certificate and power, but before plaintiff's loan was made, a court in Massachusetts removed B. from his office as trustee, and caused the trust property to be transferred to a new trustee, of which facts defendants had notice, but plaintiff had not. Plaintiff, with the assent of the borrower, inserted his own name in the blank, and requested defendants to transfer the stock to him, which they refused to do. Held, that they were justified in so refusing. – Sprague v. Cocheco Manufacturing Co., 10 Blatchf. 173.
See CONSTITUTIONAL LAW; CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, State, 2 ; DECEIT, 2; EVIDENCE, 4; Quo WARRANTO, 1; STOCK; SURVIVAL OF Actions, 1.
Costs. Where a judgment is reversed in a court of error for want of jurisdiction in the inferior court, costs in the former court are allowed, but none in the latter. - Hightower v. Handlin, 27 Ark. 20.
See ATTORNEY; CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, State, 1.
COVENANT. 1. Where to a deed of conveyance the words, “On the express understanding and agreement on the part of [the grantee] that the lot of land so conveyed is never to be sold to or occupied by negroes,” are added, these words make a covenant and not a condition. — Anthony v. Stephens, 46 Ga. 241.
2. A covenant by a lessor to convey to the lessee at the end of the term, on payment of a certain price, may be enforced by the assignee of the term, though assigns are not named in the covenant. — Napier v. Darlington, 70 Penn. St. 64. CRDINAL Law. – See AssaulT; CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, STATE, 1, 3; INDICTMENT, 1, 2; LARCENY; OFFICER, 2; Trial, 1, 2.
Custom. - See USAGE.
DAMAGES. 1. A passenger was put off a railway train for refusing to pay his fare, otherwise than by showing a paper which he claimed was a pass, but which was not such in fact. Held, (1) that he could not recover against the railway company anless unnecessary violence was used to put him off; (2) that his bona fide belief that he had a pass was immaterial on the question of damages. — Chicago, Rock Island, and Pacific R.R. Co. v. Herring, 57 Ill. 59.
2. Defendant leased to plaintiff a grist-mill, and covenanted to keep the dam in repair. In an action against him for failing so to do, held, that the measure of damages was the difference between the rental value of the mill in the condition it was in, and its value if it had been kept as defendant agreed to keep it; and that plaintiff could not recover the additional profits which he might have made if the dam had been kept in proper condition. — Winne v. Kelley, 34 Iowa, 339.
3. In trover for stock, the measure of damages is the value of the stock at the time of the conversion, with interest, and not the highest market price of the stock between the conversion and the trial. — Boylan v. Huguet, 8 Nev. 345. Nor the value at the time of the trial. — Sturges v. Keith, 57 Ill. 452.
4. In replevin of property having a usable value (as a horse), the value of its use during the time of detention is a proper item of damages. — Allen v. Fox, 51 N. Y. 562. See INCUMBRANCE; TELEGRAPH.
Days OF GRACE. — See AGENT; CHECK.
DECEIT. 1. Fraudulent misrepresentations of a vendor of real estate, as to the price which he paid therefor, are not actionable. (KENT and DICKERSON, JJ., dissenting.) — Holbrook v. Connor, 60 Me. 578.
2. A director of a company is not liable for representations, false in fact, but not known by bim to be so, made in published circulars of the company, on which his name appears only as one of the list of directors. — Wakeman v. Dalley, 51 N. Y. 27.
3. Where the plaintiff declares for fraud and deceit in the sale of a chattel, he cannot recover for a breach of warranty. (Lott, Ch. C., dissenting.) - Ross v. Mather, 51 N. Y. 108. See MISJOINDER.
DEED. A receipt under seal, signed by the mark of a person unable to read, held, not binding on the maker, in the absence of proof that he heard it read, or otherwise had notice of its contents. — Dorsheimer v. Rorback, 8 C. E. Green, 46. See ESTOPPEL.
DELIVERY.-See Donatio Causa MORTIS.
DEVISE. Testator, after devising two specific parcels of his real estate to A. and B., gave to C. “ the balance” of his real estate. Held, a specific, and not a residuary devise, and that C. was entitled to contribution from the other devisees, for a portion of the land devised to him taken to pay debts of the testator. Henderson v. Green, 34 Iowa, 437. See ESTATE Tail; Will, 1, 2.
DIRECTOR. — See DECEIT, 2.
DIVIDEND. - See STOCK.
Donatio Causa MoRTis.
is not affected by the fact that the thing given is not in the actual possession of the giver, so that delivery is impossible. — Case v. Dennison, 9 R. I. 88.
DOWER. A wife released dower by joining in her husband's conveyance, which the grantee failed to record. Afterwards, a subsequent creditor of the husband recovered judgment against him, and levied execution on the land. Held, that though the prior conveyance was thus avoided, the right of dower was for ever barred. (WALKER and MCALLISTER, JJ., dissenting.) — Morton v. Noble, 57 III. 176.
EJECTMENT. The common-law action of ejectment is neither an action “ for tort” nor “for trespass upon, or damages to, realty,” within the meaning of statutes limiting the time for prosecuting such actions. -- Lopez v. Downing, 46 Ga. 120. ELECTION. — See SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE; VOTER.
. EQUITY. Where the purchaser of real estate, the title to which has partially failed, has given notes for the purchase-money, equity will at his suit restrain the vendor from transferring the notes. — McDunn v. Des Moines, 34 Iowa, 467.
See AssUMPSIT; EXECUTOR AND ADMINISTRATOR, 1; INJUNCTION; MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, 1; OFFICER, 1. EQUITY PLEADING AND PRACTICE. — See AMENDMENT, 1; Nonsult.
Estate Tail. Devise to M. for life, and to such lawful issue of his body as he may have by any after-marriage, their heirs and assigns for ever. Held, that M. took an estate tail. (By five judges against four, in Court of Errors, reversing the decree of the Court of Chancery.) – Zabriskie v. Wood, 8 C. E. Green, 541.
ESTOPPEL. If one having no title to land conveys it with warranty to A. by deed duly recorded, and afterwards acquires title and conveys to B., B. is estopped to aver that the grantor was not seised at the time of the conveyance to A.; and this, whether that conveyance was by indenture or deed-poll. (POTTER, J., dissenting.) - McCusker v. McEvoy, 9 R. I. 528.
EVIDENCE. 1. Action on the case for speaking words charging the plaintiff with a crime. Plea, that the words were true. Held, that the defendant was bound to prove his averment by a preponderance of testimony only, and not beyond a reasonable doubt, as in an indictment for the crime. — Ellis v. Buzzell, 60 Me. 209.
2. A person's enlistment into the military service of the United States is not provable by parol, nor by the provost-marshal's certificate of the fact, without a copy of the record. — Atwood v. Winterport, 60 Me. 250.
3. Admissions made by one partner after the dissolution of the partnership as to matters occurring before the dissolution, are competent evidence in an action against the other partners. (Day, J., dissenting.) – Feigley v. Whitaker, 22 Ohio St. 606.
4. Whether, in an action brought under the provisions of a statute to charge a stockholder with debts of a corporation, proof of a judgment against the company is evidence of the existence of a debt against the company, quære. (By one judge, that it is primd facie evidence; by one, that it is conclusive; by two, that it is no evidence at all.) — McMahon v. Macy, 51 N. Y. 155.
5. Parol evidence is inadmissible to prove that one who has made a written contract in his own name, was, and was known by the other party to be, only an agent. – Babbett v. Young, 51 N. Y. 238.
6. On the trial of an action to recover damages for an injury to plaintiff's house by a change in the grade of a street, a photograph of the house is admissible in evidence, when the jury cannot have a view. — Church v. Milwaukee, 31 Wis. 512.
See DAMAGES, 1; JUDICIAL NOTICE; MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, 2; WitNESS.
EXECUTION. — See CHATTEL MORTGAGE.
EXECUTOR AND ADMINISTRATOR. 1. Next of kin can have no relief in equity against sureties on an administrator's bond, given to the ordinary. — Dorsheimer v. Rorback, 8 C. E. Green, 46.
2. When an executor dies, not having fully administered, his executor is accountable for so much of the personalty of the first testator as has been converted into money, and the administrator de bonis non of the first testator is entitled only to the remainder. — Carrick v. Carrick, 8 C. E. Green, 364.
3. Action against executors on a promissory note made by the testator. Plea, a statute limiting the time for bringing actions against executors. Replication, that the testator by his will directed the payment of all his debts, whether barred by the Statute of Limitations or otherwise. Held, bad. — Bosworth v. Smith, 9 R. I. 67.
See CONFLICT OF FEDERAL AND STATE AUTHORITY, 1; SURVIVAL OF ACTIONS, 1; Will, 2.
FALSE REPRESENTATIONS. — See DECEIT.
FIXTURE. Stone piers supporting a railroad, set in land over which the railroad has a right of way, do not pass to the land-owner if the construction of the road is abandoned. — Wagner v. Cleveland and Toledo R.R. Co., 22 Ohio St. 563.
FOREIGN JUDGMENT. — See CONFLICT OF Laws, 2.
FRAUD. — See DECEIT.
FRAUDS, STATUTE OF. 1. Defendant corporation authorized their agent by a written resolve, signed by their secretary, to make a contract with plaintiffs, on terms fully set out in the resolve. The agent showed the resolve to plaintiffs, who verbally accepted the terms. Held, that there was a complete contract, and a sufficient memorandum